Hi C.H.
"C.H.Ling" wrote:
>
> No, 42/2.8 is the lens for RC, RD has a 40/1.7 Six element lens.
You're absolutely right. I had the data sheets for both the RC and the
RD open, and copied the wrong data down for my email.
Sorry.
I have used them, but never owned one.
I'm trying to turn that situation around if I ever find an SP or SPn.
I have little interest in any other Olys except the SP and the 35S II.
That will complete my collection.
Anyhow, I took all my date from this site:
http://www.claus-marin.de/indexeng.htm
In my bookmarks I label that the "Oly Rangefinder" site. It seems some
of the data is out of date, or incorrect, or both.
More in what they missed than have wrong.
I know of no other site that covers Olympus rangefinders, so if any of
you can help, it would be appreciated.
Thanks for your comments,
keith whaley
Los Angeles
> I have all
> three but never compared their lens, anyway I'm very happy with their lens
> performance. As the topic of bokeh is hot, I can tell you the SP is
> exceptional good in this department.
>
> C.H.Ling
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Keith Whaley" <keith_w@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> > I have read of no tests, but the RD, released in 1970 had a 42mm f/2.8
> > lens, of 5 elements, in 4 groups.
> > The SP's lens was manufactured with 7 elements in 5 groups.
> > It's reasonable to assume the RD's lenses were not quite as good as
> > the SP's were.
> >
> > keith whaley - still looking for a black SP! <g>
> >
> > "Carlos J. Santisteban Salinas" wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi, everyone.
> > >
> > > > It's been said the Olympus 35 SP, made in 1970, with it's 42mm f/1.7
> > > > lens, is fully the equal of, or surpasses the performance of, the
> > > > equivalent Leica's lens. Don't believe me? Check it out!
> > >
> > > How does the Olympus 35 RD's lens perform against the 35 SP?
> > >
> > > Thanks in advance,
< 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 >
|