philosomatographer
Well-known
Regarding 50/1.4 vs 50/3.5 - common logic dictates that a "slower" lens design will almost always be superior to a "faster" lens design, but it does not always hold in practice. It has much more to do with the individual design of the lens, and (even more importantly) the time and cost incurred in its manufacture - i.e. precision of lens grinding and assembly.
In the end, though, we have to admit that almost all 50mm lenses, whether slow by design, or stopped to down (to f/3.5 - f/4) are pretty much perfect, and you'd need very good technique to show a difference - forget hand-holding, for example.
I have, over the years, used many 50mm lenses of different designs and systems. You'd honestly be hard-pressed to tell a difference between any of them at f/3.5! The single stand-out in my experience is the M-mount Voigtländer Heliar 50mm f/3.5 - it has an above-average combination of resolution yet "gentle" rendering of out-of-focus areas. All other 50s - from a Noctilux, to a Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L, to the various Nikkors, to the various Zuikos, look pretty much the same at f/4. The Zuiko 50/1.4 >1.1m is diffraction-limited by f/5.6 (optically perfect) but of course it's not know for smooth out-of-focus areas.
If you want a 50 to get excited about, consider the Zuiko 50mm f/2.0 Macro (it' a bit bog for a Zuiko though). Like it's 90mm sibling, there is something extraordinary going on in the optics of that lens - it stands head and shoulders above every other SLR 50mm ever made in many people's opinion. This is not about resolution (although it does best even the Zeiss Makro-Planar 50/2.0 in that regard, wide open at infinity) but about the way it projects the range of tones of the subject. Olympus used some special combinations of proprietary glass in the two f/2.0 Macros that (can) imbue the image with a special tonal range that I have not seen any other lens regularly produce. Not even the 250/2.0, even though it's on paper the all-out best-performing Zuiko. Probably the two finest optical designs in history, in my humble opinion
Bottom line is - use any 50mm lens that you enjoy, and forget about the technicalities. Look for the good light and the good colour (if colour is your thing...). Any Zuiko 50mm will do a splendid job of projecting your composition onto film flawlessly.
In the end, though, we have to admit that almost all 50mm lenses, whether slow by design, or stopped to down (to f/3.5 - f/4) are pretty much perfect, and you'd need very good technique to show a difference - forget hand-holding, for example.
I have, over the years, used many 50mm lenses of different designs and systems. You'd honestly be hard-pressed to tell a difference between any of them at f/3.5! The single stand-out in my experience is the M-mount Voigtländer Heliar 50mm f/3.5 - it has an above-average combination of resolution yet "gentle" rendering of out-of-focus areas. All other 50s - from a Noctilux, to a Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L, to the various Nikkors, to the various Zuikos, look pretty much the same at f/4. The Zuiko 50/1.4 >1.1m is diffraction-limited by f/5.6 (optically perfect) but of course it's not know for smooth out-of-focus areas.
If you want a 50 to get excited about, consider the Zuiko 50mm f/2.0 Macro (it' a bit bog for a Zuiko though). Like it's 90mm sibling, there is something extraordinary going on in the optics of that lens - it stands head and shoulders above every other SLR 50mm ever made in many people's opinion. This is not about resolution (although it does best even the Zeiss Makro-Planar 50/2.0 in that regard, wide open at infinity) but about the way it projects the range of tones of the subject. Olympus used some special combinations of proprietary glass in the two f/2.0 Macros that (can) imbue the image with a special tonal range that I have not seen any other lens regularly produce. Not even the 250/2.0, even though it's on paper the all-out best-performing Zuiko. Probably the two finest optical designs in history, in my humble opinion
Bottom line is - use any 50mm lens that you enjoy, and forget about the technicalities. Look for the good light and the good colour (if colour is your thing...). Any Zuiko 50mm will do a splendid job of projecting your composition onto film flawlessly.
Last edited:
Phil I don't disagree with anything you say but I did have a reason for looking for a 50/1.4 that's really good and that is to use it at f1.4 and then f2.0 without having to shell out for the macro.
I do shoot mostly at f5.6 and f8 so the f3.5 macro is now my go-to 50.
Eventually I do plan to have both the 90/2 and 50/2, but that's not really reasonable right now for me.
I do shoot mostly at f5.6 and f8 so the f3.5 macro is now my go-to 50.
Eventually I do plan to have both the 90/2 and 50/2, but that's not really reasonable right now for me.
philosomatographer
Well-known
Maiku
Maiku
I have become a Zuikioholic! All photos taken with either an OM4 or OM2n and 50/1.4 or 85/2. I am on the look out for a 35/2.8. The OM4 and OM2n are simple magnificent. The 50/1.4 is superb but 85/2 is just amazing!
Attachments
Maiku
Maiku
Maiku
Maiku
jmilkins
Digited User
thank you for the reply Roland - looks like they go best as a pair. That's fine, just means flexibility/choices.
~ Andrea ~
Newbie
Hi,
this is my first sharing on this forum
Just a couple of shots from my OM-2S with the Zuiko 55mm 1.2
I hope you'll like them.
Please don't forget to check my blog post regarding this special lens:
http://blog.andreapress.net/equipment/olympus-om-2s-zuiko-55mm-f1-2/
this is my first sharing on this forum
Just a couple of shots from my OM-2S with the Zuiko 55mm 1.2
I hope you'll like them.
Please don't forget to check my blog post regarding this special lens:
http://blog.andreapress.net/equipment/olympus-om-2s-zuiko-55mm-f1-2/
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
Paolo Bonello
3 from 36 on a good day.
Speaking of meters. I have 2x om2n and 1x OM2s. All were displaying different meter readings at the same subject and I suspected none were perfect so I sent them down to Nagami camera in Melbourne. Turns out they were all exposing at least one stop under or over.
The point is; either I'm really unlucky or you really should get these puppies checked by a pro (if you plan making it a regular user) to determine whether you have an accurate meter and speed. Just don't assume all is fine and wonder why your shots don't look that great.
BTW, I only plan on keeping 2 of them. One will likely go to a friend or for sale.
The point is; either I'm really unlucky or you really should get these puppies checked by a pro (if you plan making it a regular user) to determine whether you have an accurate meter and speed. Just don't assume all is fine and wonder why your shots don't look that great.
BTW, I only plan on keeping 2 of them. One will likely go to a friend or for sale.
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
Hi,
this is my first sharing on this forum
Just a couple of shots from my OM-2S with the Zuiko 55mm 1.2
I hope you'll like them.
Please don't forget to check my blog post regarding this special lens:
http://blog.andreapress.net/equipment/olympus-om-2s-zuiko-55mm-f1-2/
Wow, those are really cool!
ferider
Mentor
Agreed - and no, you are not unlucky (or we both are).
I converged on 3 bodies (2 x OM1, 1 x OM2), and they were all CLA'ed. The meter is one issue (not only over/under, but sensitivity varies, too). The other thing is the prism foam that has to be removed on most OM[12] bodies (on all OM2n for sure) - it's a ticking time bomb.
Roland.
The foam in my 1 is bad...
Is that really a problem? I just ignore it to be honest.
Is that really a problem? I just ignore it to be honest.
EthanFrank
Well-known
I have that too, but I got the OM-1 for next to nothing, so who cares?
When I take portraits, it just makes me subject look like they have a beard in the viewfinder.
jmilkins
Digited User
OM user on the edge of despair! Not me but wonderful writing....
http://dyladad.wordpress.com/2011/09/21/a-brand-apart-the-end-of-my-love-affair-with-olympus/
http://dyladad.wordpress.com/2011/09/21/a-brand-apart-the-end-of-my-love-affair-with-olympus/
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
He only despairs because he shoots digital. Oly digitals are not OMs.
Though I do await the rebirth of Maitani-san.
Though I do await the rebirth of Maitani-san.
jmilkins
Digited User
Yes. I for one am content to build a system of OMs and Zuikos that I could never have afforded new. Maitani's spirit lives in them and takes me to a more considered age in photography than the 10- frame- a -second speed date that this week's current digital flash in the pan allows for..amazing as they may be.
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
John,
Love your OM shots on flickr, especially Iz with the 85/2.
Love your OM shots on flickr, especially Iz with the 85/2.
Field
Well-known
Pete B
Well-known
I'm just wading through this thread. I'm on page 42 so far! I used to have an black OM1 with a 50/1.8 that I bought for £66 about 15 years ago; an impulse buy as I past a shop window. I borrowed the money off a friend I was with. I off-loaded it on ebay when I bought my first digital slr thinking that no one will be using film from now on. How wrong I was. I've been on a Leica M trip for the last year or so but today I received my new OM kit from the "bay". A OM1n, OM2n, two winder2s, 2x50mm/1.4, one 135/3.5 and a 28/3.5 and the T32 flash. £200. Result! I think I'm going to be selling a lot of Leica kit soon
Pete
Pete