Hey Joel,
Are you a Linn County resident? I used to live North east of Marion for six
years from 1990 to 1996. Sold farm seed in eight East Central Counties,
including Linn, Cedar, Johnson and more. Live now in Ames and am moving to
North Carolina next month. I know all the places you have in your gallery.
Alex
----- Original Message -----
From: "Wilcox, Joel F" <joel-wilcox@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <olympus@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2004 8:56 AM
Subject: [OM] Re: I, Zuiko?
>
> Sure, I can tell you the consensus of this group. HAHAHAHA ;-)
>
> I'm building a little silvernose set, but not doing too well. The
> 24/2.8 is SC but not silver and very well used but it seems just as
> tight if not moreso than the MC version. The 35/2.8 is silver and a
> real beauty. The 100/2.8 SC is my very most favorite silver lens. I got
> my silver 50/1.8 SC as a body cap in a body purchase, fixed the loose
> focus grip with double-sided tape, and use it whenever I want to take
> good shots AND look even more retro-hip than usual.
>
> The last shot on this page was taken with the 50/1.8 SC:
>
> http://members.tripod.com/jdubikins/winter/winter.html
>
> There is a little flare. You can maybe make it out on some of the lower
> branches. But I get a little flare with MC lenses under similar
> circumstances.
>
> I recall Gary Reese speculating that the MC conversion was done more to
> meet market demand, or at least that is how the timing appeared. Does
> anyone recall that Olympus was going MC to address a known flare
> problem? I never heard that. The testers in the photo mags made a big
> deal about the lack of coatings and down-graded Olympus' lenses for lack
> of MCs. The rest is history.
>
> I'm still looking for a nice silver 85/2 SC. :) If anyone's got one for
> me, it's only worth $50 because it's a crappy SC lens, OK?
>
> Joel W.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > Hi Moose:
> >
> > While we're on the topic, what is the consensus on these lenses?
> >
> > Most (all?) are SC but is that the biggest factor. I think
> > Jim said that he
> > found his older lens 'warmer'. The coating may be more
> > critical for wide
> > angle lenses subject to flare in some lighting conditions,
> > although even
> > with my 21/3.5 I never ever experienced a problem. I have had 4 of the
> > Lettered Z's, a 21/3.5, 24/2.8, 100/2.8 and 300/4.5 all are not only
> > immaculate but in 2 cases, the 24 and the 100 I chose them
> > over the MC's
> > that I had, keeping them and selling the MC's. Are 'we' being
> > too quick to
> > dismiss them? I think in some cases the 'buzz' about coatings
> > may not be the
> > first or second criteria for choosing a lens. What is the
> > real experience
> > out there? If you are of the opinion that the MC are
> > superior, I'd like to
> > know, when and how?
> >
> > Gord
>
> The olympus mailinglist olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
> To unsubscribe: mailto:olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
>
> To contact the list admins:
mailto:olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx?subject="Olympus List Problem"
>
The olympus mailinglist olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: mailto:olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
To contact the list admins: mailto:olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx?subject="Olympus
List Problem"
|