Hi all,
>it happens that the switch in styling from silver nose to
>black nose roughly coincided in time with the optical switch to
>multi-coating.
Not necessarily... that may be the case for the 50/1.4 (AFAIK, the first of
the non-macro 50s to be MC), but some lenses (like the fast wides) were MC
from the start -- even the silvernosed samples. OTOH, some other lenses
(28/3.5, 135/3.5) were never made multicoated, even in blacknose. I think
the silvernose->blacknose switch was made around 1977-1978, no matter the
coatings used, and the generalization of MC (new ZUIKO nomenclature) was
around 1983.
I believe the X.ZUIKO / ZUIKO MC / ZUIKO marking scheme (SC / MC / MC) to
be a safer way to tell a multicoated lens -- but still not 100% safe! I had
a ZUIKO 135mm 1:3,5 (last nomenclature) whose reflections looked the same
as the E.ZUIKO 1:3,5 f=135mm (first scheme, surely SC).
Judging SC/MC by looking at the colours of the reflections is NOT easy.
*Theoretically*, SC reflections bear 'secondary' colours (purple,
yellow-gold, light blue) and MC reflections show 'primary' colours (deep
blue, red, green). BUT if you see together the, say, red reflection on a MC
surface with the green reflection of another MC surface, you'll get a
*yellow* reflection, usually associated with SC... Plus, the colour of
these reflections may shift depending on the angle.
>>The "MIJ" lens was the culmination of a long line of development and is
>>probably the best overall performer. However, that does not mean that
>>the other lenses were bad as we're talking extremely fine gradations in
>>performance here. The Zuiko 50mm f/1.8 is an extremely fine lens in any
>>version.
...as are most lenses of its kind. Those 50-55-58mm F1.7-1.8-2 are easy
lenses to design/formulate, thus the best value no matter the brand -- high
performance, compact, lightweight and inexpensive.
>Wellllllll......... My first 50/1.8, among the first 50,000 made out of
>5-6 million 50/1.8s is not awful, but to call it "an extremely fine
>lens" is definitly overstatement. I was surprised to find the 35-70/3.6
>I bought later was quite a bit better at 50mm than the prime.
>From my experience with the miJ 50/1.8, this is a lens optimized for
*resolution* at the expense of contrast. I was too surprised to find the
35-70/3.5-4.5 (that's the 35-70 Zuiko I've got) to *look* better at 50mm
than the prime -- even at the same aperture! But this is due to higher
contrast. When looking for the ultimate resolution, the 50/1.8 is indeed a
very fine lens.
That said, the 35-70/3.5-4.5 is no slouch, either!
Enjoy,
...
Carlos J. Santisteban
<cjss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<http://cjss.galeon.com>
The olympus mailinglist olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: mailto:olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
To contact the list admins: mailto:olympusadmins@xxxxxxxxxx?subject="Olympus
List Problem"
|