Bill,sorry but this answer doesn't help much me!...I buy any lens only if it's in good conditions.
I need the best 50 mm,I repeat (i'm sorry...I'm tired too!!!...I'm sorry...I'msorry my friends!) I don't need brightness...I need sharpness,contrast...acutance anything else!!!..This is not a subjective detail, it is an objective detail... It is mathematics:the technical features of any lens are objective,they does not depend on personal taste ...they are equal for all, are universal. It's a picture you get with that lens that is subjectively good or bad ... not the lens in itself...The sharpness,the contrast,the distortion of lens are technical datas that are measured in laboratory scientifically ... not through personal tastes.At least it's my opinion...I hope that you can understand me.I know that write and speak english very bad.i'm very sorry for this.
It would be sufficient only a rapid answer...anything else!...Zuiko 1.4 or Zuiko 1.8...this is the dilemma!
Please don't hate me friends!
There is no BEST.
My answers are based on owing and using these for 38 years.
Sorry I have.no more to offer.
I know that we are frustrating you, but there really isn't a clear answer to your question.
Originally Posted by peters8
If you exclude the small difference in maximum aperture, and are comparing performance stopped down a stop or two, the Zuiko 50mm 1.4 and 1.8 lenses perform very similarly - any difference in performance is more likely due to sample variation then it is due to design differences.
If you do measure those things that can be measured on an optical bench, you will probably find that one will be slightly better at one f/stop, while the other will be slightly better art another.
The later versions have better coatings.
The f/1.4 version gives you a brighter viewfinder. The f/1.8 version is very compact.
Ok i'm grateful for your patience and for the big support you have given to me!thanks you to everyone! i've decided.i'll buy the 1.4
only the last question:is the G.Zuiko the single coated version?
Originally Posted by peters8
My Nikkor UD 20/3.5 should be even crappier, with it's 11 single coated elements (I forget the number of air-to-glass surfaces) but it's also an excellent lens. It's the number of internal sufaces, not the number of elements, anyway.
Originally Posted by mopar_guy
With both the 1.8 and 1.4 lenses, the earlier versions tended to be sharper in the center. Later versions not quite as sharp in the center, but the corners are sharper. Later versions of both lenses also are contrastier, less flare prone and SLIGHTLY more flat-fielded.
If stopped down in the F5.6 to F8 realm, the 1.8 and 1.4 render nearly identical images. My controlled testing reveals no advantage one to the other.
I personally reach for the 1.4 because of how the bokeh renders. It's just a little more artsy. Mine are all of the last version made.
I don't think the 50/2 replaced the 50/3.5. The f/2 lens was much more espensive. I have the f/3.5 and it is sharp at every distance and f/stop. If a normal lens will be used closed down and you are yearning for sharpness, get a medium format camera. If I use a Bronica GS-1 with the normal 100/3.5 lens I will expect to get a sharper 8X10, 11X14, 16X20 etc. than any standard lens with a 35mm camera can produce.
There are 5 different 50mm 1.8. Te best one was the last one made: it says "made in Japan" on the name ring. It is multicoated and very sharp. There were 5 different 50mm 1.4 made. The last version is preferred by most. It is multicoated and (I think) has serial numbers above 1,110,000. John
John how do I recognize the 1.4 multicoated version?...
Originally Posted by John Hermanson
Is there a particular identification?...In my Zuiko if I remember well (now it is not with me) there's this identification:
"G.zuiko om-system Auto-s"...could this identification be right?...I'm sure that it was a G.Zuiko...Do you know something about this version/this serie?