Yesterday I wandered around a local park and shot a roll of identical
photos with these two lenses using same aperture/etc.. It may not be
the greatest test because I shot negative film (Reala) and so the
minilab printing certainly could confound the results. I was just
trying to get an idea of whether I could see any difference even in 4x6
snapshots.
The verdict: the CV 40/2 is noticably sharper and has better contrast
than the Zuiko 40/2. I can read the small lettering on tshirts and
signs clearly with the CV lens and things like hair are much more
finely rendered. This is probably no surprise to anyone as the CV is a
modern apochromatic design and the Zuiko is not renowned for its
resolution but rather for its compact size. Still, given the
stratospheric prices of the Zuiko 40/2 lately it is nice to know that
there is an excellent less expensive alternative available for those
who like the 40mm focal length. The CV does weigh 100 grams more, but
still is quite compact and feels well matched to my OM4t. The focus
ring turns the opposite of Zuiko lenses but that didn't bother me at
all, probably because I haven't had much time to get used to my OM gear
yet.
< 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 >
|