Makes no sense to me David. I would guess these two lenses would have to
same element construction but would differ only in the coatings. I have on
old Topcon 53/2 that I use as a loupe but I can see no difference with the
Zuiko 50/1.8 when used as a loupe.
Charlie
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 10:51 AM, Dawid Loubser <dawidl@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Can somebody explain this to me: I have two versions of the OM Zuiko
> 50/1.4 -
> an *ancient* sivernosed one with a low serial number (that first
> version that
> truly sucks for resolution wide open) and a mint copy of the latest >
> 1,1 mil
> version, which fights it out with the 90/2.0 for being permanently
> attached to
> the OM-1n, and has superb optical performance.
>
> Since I don't have a proper loupe, I have a habit of using a fast 50
> for a loupe (makes a pretty
> good one). For some reason, the OLD silvernose 50/1.4 makes a
> brilliant, crisp loupe which is
> a pleasure to use, whereas the new (optically better) 50/1.4
> absolutely sucks: It appears to render
> an image of completely the wrong dioptre, it's like putting on the
> wrong glasses: Everything is blurred
> and it strains the eyes.
>
> Can anybody explain this phenomenon? Has anybody seen it before? I re-
> iterate the my new 50 is optically
> visibly superior to the old 50 in terms of the images it renders on
> film, so there is nothing wrong with
> the lens.
>
> Off-topic, I know... But has anybody seen this?
>
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|