The metering tends to be off at the widest and narrowest stop or two. It
also varies a little bit with the type of metering. With my 50/1.4
wide-open, I have to add +1/3 stop compensation. At f/2.8, it's right
on. The image gradually brightens as you stop down further, with respect
to the in-camera aperture priority metering, either center-weighted or
"ESP" (pattern). At f/16, it's gotten too bright for what the metering
says. It's fine in the middle range.
Interestingly, our own Moose reported the opposite effect on his
much-lauded 300D--overexposure wide-open and slight underexposure fully
closed down. At www.wrotniak.net, Andzrej reports his E-300 gives the
same effect as Moose noticed.
The OM lenses' white balance is a little on the warm side, and again, a
little different at the widest stop. No problem if you shoot RAW or use a
one-shot white balance.
Basically, the OM Zuikos I've tried work quite well if you're willing to
put up with manual focusing on a small, plain screen, and stop-down
metering. The digital Zuikos are probably better in most cases, but if you
already have OM Zuiks, why not use them? Olympus' disclaimers may be due
to not wanting to support the metering inconsistencies, and to avoid
dealing with people who diss the camera because some people don't
understand that most wide-open lenses are not perfectly sharp.
Here's a few with my OM Zuikos:
http://users.2alpha.com/~pklein/E1/PC180419SkateRail.jpg (50/1.8 "Japan"
(not mij) )
http://users.2alpha.com/~pklein/E1/PC180434Boing2.jpg (50/1.8)
http://users.2alpha.com/~pklein/E1/PC280481SpNeedle.jpg (50/1.8)
http://users.2alpha.com/~pklein/E1/Pb270193Stickers.jpg (50/1.4, s/n in
700,000s)
http://users.2alpha.com/~pklein/E1/Pb270194BWRoof.jpg (50/1.4)
http://users.2alpha.com/~pklein/E1/Pb270206Grac.jpg (50/1.4 wide-open, and
I really like this one! Reminds me of pre-WW2 color. Sharpness ain't
everything.)
http://users.2alpha.com/~pklein/E1/Pb270209Pomp.jpg (50/1.4)
http://users.2alpha.com/~pklein/E1/Pc110338Hydrant.jpg (50/1.4)
I posted some test shots of several lenses a while back, but had to pull
them off my site due to lack of space. I may find a home fro them soon,
stay tuned.
General impressions (all MC lenses, except the 50/3.5 macro):
28/2.8: A bit better than the 14-54 at 25mm at all comparable stops, but
hard to focus.
50/1.8 "Japan": OK wide open, good stopped down. Very handy.
50/1.4 MC S/N 700,000s : Old-fashioned softness wide open, OK stopped down.
50/1.4 S/N >1,050,000: Sharper but low contrast wide-open, *very* nice
stopped down.
50/3.5 SC: Really sharp at f/5.6 or 8, probably the sharpest SLR lens I own.
100/2.8: Looks great, I'll have to shoot more with it in decent light with
a tripod to see where shake ends and resolution begins.
70-150/3.8 Vivitar. Not great at 3.8, good at 5.6 or 8. Usable throughout
zoom range.
In comparison, the 14-54 digital Zuiko zoom is OK at 14mm, good at 25mm
(normal), and really excellent at 54mm (better than the 50mm primes at some
stops).
--Peter
>"Piers Hemy" <piers@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>Which reminds me - Barry, if you haven't been paying full attention these
>past few weeks, you may have missed that Olympus have published the aperture
>ranges for which they think non-digital Zuiko lenses will produce acceptable
>results on E-1 (and I assume E-300). The ranges do not span the entire
>working range of each lens.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|
