A late model 24/2.8 Zuiko was my first wide angle. I still have it and
is one of my favourite lenses. IMHO, the best feature it has is its
excellent contrast. Olympus even advised people that if they didn't need
24/F2 then to buy the 24/F2.8 because it offers excellent optical
performance.
Rainer Wagner wrote:
> This is a very non-scientific real world test with everyday objects.
>
> I recently got a Tokina RMC 24/2,8 , and I now have tried to test this lens
> against my Zuiko 24/2,8.
>
> The Tokina is slightly bigger (longer ) than the Zuiko, it take 52mm filters
> instead of the 49mm.
> The lens is all metal and well built.
>
> I put Sensia 100 into my OM2 and took shots of buildings and a railway
> station on a sunny day, using mainly f8 and the resulting shutter speed.
> First shot was always with the Tokina, then the lens was changed and the
> second shot taken with the Zuiko. In some cases light variations occured in
> the meantime ( clouds and sun) . All shots handheld .
> The slides were inspected by
>
> slide loupe ( about 5x)
>
> Projection with Leitz Pradovit 250 , Elmaron 150/2,8
>
> Microscope at 40x , Olympus BH2 with Bino.
>
> Results:
> There was no visible difference in colour rendition.
>
> Loupe:
> no difference could be seen.
>
> Projection to about 1,2 x 1,8 m:
> there was a slight difference visible at a viewing distance of about 30cm
> ( which is of course not the normal distance for slides projected to this
> size) the black on white writing on a sign in the middle of the picture ,
> (original size on the slide : 1 mm x .6 mm) was easier readable on the Zuiko
> slide.
>
> Microscope:
> The writing on the sign described above was clearly sharper on the Zuiko
> slide, it appeared softer and les contrasty on the Tokina, but was still
> readable.
>
> Other slides were also in every case better with the Zuiko in very small,
> critical areas, but differences were only clearly visible under the
> microscope.
>
> Scanner:
> absolutely no chance to see differences with my Epson 1650 photo, everything
> came out unsharp...
>
> Conclusion:
> Differences are very small, but still in favour of the Zuiko. At normal
> slide viewing distance, differences are nor discernable .
>
> Both are excellent lenses ,taking the conditions of the pictures.
>
>
> Further tests : as soon as the sky clears up during nighttime, I will take
> pics of the sky at full opening ( this is afaik the hardest test one could
> perform)
>
> report will follow sometime...
>
> Rainer
>
>
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
>
--
Matt Boland (BEng) Phone : 61 7 5594 9824
R&D Engineer Mobile : 61 4 0835 1421
Odyx Corporation Pty Ltd email : mattboland@xxxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|