Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] Is OMZ 50 1.4 (high sn) shaper stopped down than 50 1.2? --Caut

Subject: Re: [OM] Is OMZ 50 1.4 (high sn) shaper stopped down than 50 1.2? --Caution, on topic.
From: Wayne Shumaker <om3ti@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 10 May 2021 19:41:17 -0700
At 5/10/2021 02:59 PM, Mike wrote:
>Looks like Roger at Lensrentals is no longer a hidden font of knowledge 
>requiring  going to his website at Lensrentals or blog-- now has a deserved 
>wide audience even if  in general don't exactly find the current forum where 
>they posted his article optimal.
>
>The recent installment is quite interesting about 50mm lenses and contains a 
>bit of a history lesson.  
>
>https://www.dpreview.com/news/9236543269/why-are-modern-50mm-lenses-so-damned-complicated
>
>As the Zuiko 50's are indeed double gauss-ish, his comments apply. 
>
>https://esif.world-traveller.org/om-sif/lensgroup/50mmf12.htm
>
>As he mentions many aberrations don't improve all that much stopping down such 
>as 3rd and 5th order astigmatism, elliptical coma and others.
>
>https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2016/01/what-actually-happens-when-you-stop-down-a-lens/
>
>This results in 50mm double gauss  lenses of this era  with odd situation that 
>a cheaper  slower 50mm can outperform the expensive 50/1.2 stopped down. 
>Roger at LR:
>
>
>"Unfortunately, that's not how it worked, at least not for double gauss lenses 
>wider than F1.4. Stopping down made them sharper, of course, especially in the 
>center.
> But away from center they never got wicked sharp; they got OK."
>
> That is no longer the case with very recent 50's depending on design though.
>
>Is that the case with the OMZ 50's?  I can't really tell from Gary Reese data 
>and I don't have a 50/1.2. Moose was probably correct about that lens that 
>unless you really need 1.2, for something, why bother?  Still a cool lens.  
>The OMZ
>50/2 macro seems to test better  (Gary Reese) stopped down than the 50/1.4 
>even but not sure that was statistically significant. 
>
>More 50's than know what to do with, Mike

This is nifty to know.

I had the OM 50/1.2 and the 50/1.4. It was cool to hold in the hand but the 1.8 
or the 50/2 macro was my preferred. Now I know. And I'll go with the Moose why 
bother. I have the CV 50/2 that does well. The modern 50's are quite big now. 
I'd rather have a 85 or 100 in that size. And 35mm vs 50mm...

WayneS

-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz