IIRC the formulation change on the 50/1.4 was about S/N #1085xxx -- that's
what I've heard on the list!
>35/2 (MC): Rear element does not protrude beyond its retaining ring,
>although the retaining ring itself protrudes beyond the rear of the lens
>mount. All the others with a wide tab (or horns) do protrude or are so
>close to protrusion they could easily be abraded if set on a flat surface
>at infinity focus.
Tabs and horns are then intended to protect the rear element -- seems quite
sensible to me. The rear element on my 80/4 (MC) Auto does not protrude
(from mounting ring!), nor has any kind of tab/horns.
>Long lenses: None of my long lenses have these tabs or horns (85/2 MC,
>135/2.8 MC, 200/4 MC, and 300/4.5 F.Zuiko). Their rear elemnts are always
>recessed, even at infinity focus.
The same to me, just include the 135/3.5 E.Zuiko instead of the 85/2 (sigh!)
These are the tabs/horns on my other Zuikos:
21/3.5 G.Zuiko: wide tab.
28/2 MC: wide tab.
28/2.8 (MC): pair of horns, two-tone mount.
28/3.5 G.Zuiko: wide tab.
28-48/4 (MC): pair of horns, two-tone mount.
35/2.8 G.Zuiko: wide tab.
35-70/3.5-4.5 (MC): pair of horns, two-tone mount.
50/1.4 G.Zuiko: wide tab.
50/1.4 MC #1074xxx: wide tab.
50/1.4 (MC) #1136xxx: pair of horns, two-tone mount.
50/1.8 F.Zuiko: wide tab.
50/1.8 MC: pair of horns, two-tone mount.
50/1.8 (MC): pair of horns, two-tone mount. [this is the 'made in Japan' type]
50/3.5 (MC) #208xxx: wide tab.
55/1.2 G.Zuiko: wide tab.
>Note: (MC) = MC lens made after marking was discontinued.
As you can see, (MC) lenses usually have have horns and two-tone mount, but
not always.
>Lenses can still be very usable with a very small chip
>or tiny scratch or two near the edge of the front element.
[snip]
>Any rear element marks are **death** to a lens.
According to my experience, this rule seems not to apply in super-wides. I
once made (foolishly) a nick on the front element of my Zeiss Distagon
18/4, about 2.5 mm wide. When stopped down to f/11 or beyond, this could be
clearly seen in both the viewfinder and the photos. This lens had to be
sent to Germany, where it was repolished and recoated. Now works fine, as
before.
On the other hand, my so-long-awaited Zuiko 21/3.5 has a noticeable scratch
on its rear element (see
<http://www.supercable.es/~guesas/zuiko/scratch.jpeg>). I haven't got
another 21/3.5 for comparison, but my scratched sample makes great pictures
-- it's one of my favourite lenses, in fact.
PS: Anyone willing to lend me another 21/3.5 (or 21/2, or 18/3.5, it
doesn't matter) for, say, 25 years of comparative testing? :-)
...
Carlos Santisteban
<cjss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<cjsantis@xxxxxxxx>
< 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 >
|
