> Certainly not AG, sorry if I was not making my question as
> clear as I should.
Understand that my tongue was firmly ensconced in my cheek.
> Since I had never heard before complaints about flare on a
> 3.5, I wondered
> if yours was SC or if I was missing something.
The SC version of the 50/3.5 is my most flare prone prime I've
ever owned. I don't get the rings so much as a noticable haze
over the entire image. It's only a problem when there is a
bright lightsource shining on the lens elements. Otherwise,
nothing too major. Close-up work is a non-issue.
> One must have good reasons to prefer the SC.
Schnozz's rules of Zuiko ownership. Better to have the lenses I
need, although not perfect, than to not have them because of
cost or availability. Every Zuiko I've ever owned was purchased
used. Granted, there are a few MC F2.0 lenses that I've drooled
over and would probably pick up if the price was right.
If I were to start building a Zuiko kit today (and I wouldn't
because of digital, oh well), I'd definitely seek out a set of
MC lenses.
To put things in perspective about flare control--my SC 200/4 is
less flare prone than most any zoom lens covering that focal
length. So, it's all relative.
AG
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today!
http://my.yahoo.com
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|