I think you are looking at only part of the data. Generally the f2
lenses have better, often much better, resolution at the widest f-stop
of their slower brethern, and continue to be equal or better over the
whole f-stop range. There are also differences in contrast (which
contributes to percieved sharpness) to look at. The later f2 series were
intended to be better overall lenses than the slower designs, not just
faster.
Moose
Richard F. Man wrote:
At 12:54 PM 4/20/2002 +1200, you wrote:
Hi folks,
Richard wrote
> I mean the Zuiko 40/2 is known to be an OK but not a stellar
performer?
It shows up pretty well in Gary's tests with the OM4T & prefire. A
and A+ at
smaller apertures. That's about as good as it gets. And it has 4 of
the 6
elements are special low-dispersion glass.
But C/C+ at /2? That's the point of getting a /2, isn't it? Lets
see..., at /2
<snip>
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|