Matt Boland wrote:
>There's a 300 4.5 Zuiko on Ozzie evilbay and I'm wondering what people's
>opinions are on this lenses' performance.
>
I assume you have looked at Gary's tests
<http://members.aol.com/olympusom/lenstests/default.htm>? Don't just
look at the 300/4.5, also look at the Tamron SP 400/4. It will give you
some idea how good its sibling the Tamron 3002.8 is, sort of the gold
standard for 300mm MF lenses. Then note the couple of posts already by
folks who have both the 300/4.5 and Tamron and who use the Zuiko as or
more often than the Tamron.
Although I've never had the Tamron, my assumption from much reading of
tests, posts, etc. is that the Tamron will test better than the Zuiko,
but that the performance difference in most field use will be minimal.
Except, of course, for the trade off between speed and size/weight. What
starts to happen out in supertele land is that lens support and
vibration damping become at least as important as the optical
characteristics of the lens. Look at Gary's series of tests of the same
MC 200/4 with different bodies and lens supports. Also take a look at
the tests of the 400, 600 and 1000mm Zuikos. The look pretty bad, no? In
later correspondence, Gary's has said that those tests aren't indicative
of the actual optical abilities of those lenses, but of the limitaions
of his equipment and technique at the time he did the tests. He and
others on the list have posted opinions and samples supporting the fact
that these are actually very sharp lenses, when properly supported and
damped.
The side-by-side tests of the 250/2 with OM-4 and OM-1 further
demonstrate how sensitive long lenses are to these factors. And it seems
clear that optimum solutions can vary with specific lens design.
So the answer for me is that the 300/4.5 is a fine lens, not quite as
good optically as the very best, but pretty comparable for most uses. I
like mine, but have to admit I've taken more 300mm pics with the Tamron
60-300, not because I think it is better, but because I more often have
a zoom on my camera bodies. I used it just a little while ago, but for
'atmospheric' shots through a light mist/fog with 1.5 and 2x converters,
so they aren't a way to highlight sharpness and contrast.
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|