The Zuiko 28/3.5 I had was a big-time slouch. My Zuiko 28/2 was a slouch. The
200/4 was a big-time slouch too.
All of the non-miJ 50s I've had were slouches. (I guess I've had 3 by now.)
Look at Gary's tests of the 50s. God bless him, he
just kept testing them, as if to say, "We must have a winner one day!" The
finest one doesn't come close to the performance of the
3.6 zoom, a *more modern design*.
My 100/2.8 was a great lens and the 135/3.5 was good too. So, if I scored my
Zuikos on a slouch/total basis, 6/8 were slouches. In
my opinion, there was room for improvement in sharpness, yeah. The fit and
finish are really beautiful but they're tools to me. If
I had not found test results on the web that pointed me to sharper 3-party
lenses, I might have jumped into an EOS film body by now.
Not that I'm complaining... anymore.
ducking for cover,
Lama
From: "Earl Dunbar" 3. While the hype over Zuiko Digital lenses is, from what I
can see, quite justified, that doesn't make older
Zuikos slouches.
< 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 >
|