Moose,
After listening Ken's experience, I did try out my Super Multi Coated
Takumar 50/1.4 this morning, on my E-1. My conclusion, without a really
scientific approach, but using similar subjects, was that the Tak is nowhere
near as sharp as my Leica-R lenses. It does wonders with portraits, though,
where sharpness is less desirable.
I also noted that the bokeh of the Tak is not as nice as that which I get
with Leica lenses.
Jim Nichols
Tullahoma, TN USA
----- Original Message -----
From: "Moose" <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>
To: "Olympus Camera Discussion" <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 6:08 PM
Subject: Re: [OM] Dude - Who stole my 0.56ms?
> On 4/6/2010 2:41 PM, Ken Norton wrote:
>> ... It's a real sleeper of a lens--probably among the sharpest lenses
>> ever made in the OM mount.
>
> Sigh.
>
> Amazing how a lens that many here have praised forever can somehow be a
> sleeper - an under valued, under appreciated lens, when you finally try
> one and find what so many have known for ages.
>
> Just 'cause you didn't know, and apparently didn't believe anybody else,
> including Gary's tests, doesn't mean it was necessarily a sleeper to
> anybody but you. As Gary pointed out, one of its special qualities is
> the even performance across apertures, which frees up the photographer
> in important ways.
>
> Don't get me wrong, I'm glad you have found your latest nirvana, and
> hope you get many great images with it. It is a great lens and I'm glad
> it excites you. But is the hyperbole needed? Would it kill you to say
> something like "Wow!, All you folks who have praised this lens are
> right, it IS a step up from what came before."
>
> Next, maybe you need to try a Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 50/1.4. ;-)
> (Do I have that right; fully spelled out version better than later,
> "SMC" version?) That one is famous even outside of Pentax circles.
>
>> Other than focal-length and aperture, I don't think it bears ANY
>> resemblance to the previous generations.
>
> Hmmmm ... So you wrote all those detailed commentaries on various
> vintages of 50/1.4, making comparisons of super sharp center and soft
> edges in the oldest vs. better overall quality across the frame, but
> unfortunately with some lost center sharpness ... early, middle and late
> SC, early and late MC and yada, yada, yada without including the final,
> generally acknowledged best of breed version?
>
>> It has a few bad habits in the bokeh department,
>
> Yup, like all their 50s I've used. Certain combos of subject and
> background distances aren't pleasing. It's noticeable in an OM
> viewfinder, but often there's not much to be done to avoid it unless
> subject of background is movable.
>
>> but otherwise is near perfect.
>>
>
> Yup.
>> AG (very happy he found his 6cm holder for the enlarger) Schnozz
>>
>
> Goodie!
>
> A. Testy Moose
>
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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/
|