On 7/26/2021 10:19 AM, Wayne Shumaker wrote:
At 7/26/2021 07:50 AM, jan wrote:
Sample variation?
I currently have two. Each of them is markedly better than my 600/6.5.
So, you could have a bum 500/8, or I could have a bum 600/6.5.
My copy from a long time ago was not that impressive either. A friend and I
built a 6 inch telescope as a teenager.
I built a 4 1/4" telescope in my early teens. 😁
The silver coating on the mirror would degrade easily. Not sure about this lens
if there is some protective coating on the silver?
I assume so, for this and all such lenses, as I don't recall any complaints. Everything else is multi coated, so I
assume the mirror would be, too. In my specific case, the lens is pristine, and the mirror looks flawless, peering in
with a flashlight.
The fixed F8, donuts, low contrast, and tricky focus was not for me. I shot
maybe one roll of film with it before giving it up. The 100/2 was a much better
portrait lens. I don't recall how well the 500 worked with the micro prism on
the screen either, where a lower F-stop lens works better.
I imagine the split image and microprism focus aids on standard screens would not work. A 1-8 screen would likely be
best. Of no consequence using it on a mirrorless camera with electronic focusing aids and magnified view.
Semi Blurry Moose
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|