Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,338   Posts: 1,537,727   Online: 816
      
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 30
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    110

    Confused by OM 50mm lenses

    Hi, I have been surfing the web all the morning (waiting for a bed to be delivered) regarding the OM 50mm 1.8 lenses. It appears that the most recent lens is in fact similar in layout to an enlarger lens, with 6 elements in 4 groups:
    http://www.star.ucl.ac.uk/~rwesson/e.../50mm_f1.8.pdf

    Can anyone say whether this is also the case for the "Japan" version?

    Do I need to get an older one (F-Zuiko) in order to have the lens design similar to the 1.4 and Pentax M 1.7 50 which I am used to, as shown in the front page of the same UCL site, where the front group doesnt have the doublet?
    http://www.star.ucl.ac.uk/~rwesson/e...up/50mmf18.htm

    Thanks.

  2. #2
    Richard Sintchak (rich815)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    San Francisco area
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,923
    Images
    1
    -----------------------

    "Well, my photos are actually much better than they look..."

    Richard S.
    Albany, CA (San Francisco bay area)

    My Flickr River of photographs
    http://flickriver.com/photos/rich815...r-interesting/

    My Photography Website
    http://www.lightshadowandtone.com

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Adirondacks
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,381
    Quote Originally Posted by hoojammyflip View Post
    Hi, I have been surfing the web all the morning (waiting for a bed to be delivered) regarding the OM 50mm 1.8 lenses. It appears that the most recent lens is in fact similar in layout to an enlarger lens, with 6 elements in 4 groups:
    http://www.star.ucl.ac.uk/~rwesson/e.../50mm_f1.8.pdf

    Can anyone say whether this is also the case for the "Japan" version?

    Do I need to get an older one (F-Zuiko) in order to have the lens design similar to the 1.4 and Pentax M 1.7 50 which I am used to, as shown in the front page of the same UCL site, where the front group doesnt have the doublet?
    http://www.star.ucl.ac.uk/~rwesson/e...up/50mmf18.htm

    Thanks.
    Why are you worried about the design of the lenses? Most all fast normals for 35mm are a variation on the Double Gauss formula, with various tweekings to add the requisite degree of retrofocus. They all, once you get above a certain level of performance, behave similarly.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    New Jersey (again)
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    1,976
    I agree that I wouldn't spend too much time fretting over the lens design. And with prices as they are, there's no reason that you can't buy both at a fraction of the original price. Shoot both and stick with the one that you like the best.

    Or if you really want the original, switch to a Contax (or Rolleiflex) setup and get a Planar. Zeiss has called this the most-plagiarized lens design in photographic history. That is, nearly every lens maker used the Planar design as the basis for their standard 50mm lens.
    Last edited by elekm; 05-21-2013 at 10:12 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Adirondacks
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,381
    Quote Originally Posted by elekm View Post
    I agree that I wouldn't spend much time fretting over the lens design. And with prices as they are, there's no reason that you can't buy both at a fraction of the original price. Shoot both and stick with the one that you like the best.

    Or if you really want the original, switch to a Contax (or Rolleiflex) setup and get a Planar. Zeiss has called this the most-plagiarized lens in photographic history. That is, nearly every lens maker used the Planar design as the basis for their standard 50mm lens.
    The Planar is a double Gauss design. IIRC the 50/2 Sonnars (or one of the other fast 50s) for the prewar Contax were also dG types, so maybe they'd be the original.
    Last edited by E. von Hoegh; 05-21-2013 at 10:14 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    110
    Thanks I've already looked at the Mir site: the lens diagram relates to the old 5 group 6 element 50/1.8. There is a 50/2 lower down with the same enlarger type lens diagram as the MIJ.

    I have just had a OM1n refurbished (by Michael Spencer, highly recommended). I am intending on moving over to Olympus in order to make full use of my Tamron SP 90/2.5 which I find to be an excellent lens. It focuses in the opposite direction to my Pentax lenses and often catches me out, whereas its the same direction as the Olympus lenses.

    Prior to committing to the move from Pentax to Olympus, I thought I would compare the Oly lenses to the Pentax lenses. Both the OM 28/2.8 and OM 135/3.5 I have seem to perform very well, even in comparison to my Pentax M 28/3.5 which is a very sharp lens, and also in comparison to the Tamron SP 90/2.5 which can act as a control, as it can be mounted to both the Pentax and Olympus cameras. Looking at my test negatives (x25 scope under a Nikkor EL 50/2.8N in the enlarger) I was struck by the MIJ being softer than the Pentax 50/1.7. In order to exclude the possibility of mucking up the test, I will simply shoot the test again.

    The significance of this is that I don't think I can print larger than 5x7 with the MIJ shots and have a sharp photo, whereas 12x16 would not be out of the question with the Pentax M 50/1.7.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Adirondacks
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,381
    Quote Originally Posted by hoojammyflip View Post
    Thanks I've already looked at the Mir site: the lens diagram relates to the old 5 group 6 element 50/1.8. There is a 50/2 lower down with the same enlarger type lens diagram as the MIJ.

    I have just had a OM1n refurbished (by Michael Spencer, highly recommended). I am intending on moving over to Olympus in order to make full use of my Tamron SP 90/2.5 which I find to be an excellent lens. It focuses in the opposite direction to my Pentax lenses and often catches me out, whereas its the same direction as the Olympus lenses.

    Prior to committing to the move from Pentax to Olympus, I thought I would compare the Oly lenses to the Pentax lenses. Both the OM 28/2.8 and OM 135/3.5 I have seem to perform very well, even in comparison to my Pentax M 28/3.5 which is a very sharp lens, and also in comparison to the Tamron SP 90/2.5 which can act as a control, as it can be mounted to both the Pentax and Olympus cameras. Looking at my test negatives (x25 scope under a Nikkor EL 50/2.8N in the enlarger) I was struck by the MIJ being softer than the Pentax 50/1.7. In order to exclude the possibility of mucking up the test, I will simply shoot the test again.

    The significance of this is that I don't think I can print larger than 5x7 with the MIJ shots and have a sharp photo, whereas 12x16 would not be out of the question with the Pentax M 50/1.7.
    While there are some soft lenses, particularly the 50/1.4 Zuiko early versions, you'll likely find more sample to sample variation than maker-to-maker.

    When you say "enlarger lens" type, do you realise that the same basic designs are used, that there are Tessar, double-Gauss, Plasmat, Dialyt, and so on types of enlarger lens? That there is no such thing as an "enlarger lens type"?

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Mission Viejo, California
    Shooter
    127 Format
    Posts
    1,456
    Certainly individual copies will show variances due to age and environment.

    My favorite OM Zuiko 50/1.8's are the silver nosed F.Zuiko and the first gen black nosed MC. The acclaimed MIJ and 'Japan' marked versions have sealed front groups that can not be cleaned. If they have internal haze or fungus you have to live with it.

    Although tie 1.8's are reported to be sharper or more contrasty, I prefer the 1.4's especially for their 8 aperture blades versus 6 on the 1.8's.

    I would like to add that my experience with OM lenses is they all benefit tremendously from the use of a lens hood in daylight.
    - Bill Lynch

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    110
    yep, referring to the common 4 group 6 element design of Nikkor 50/2.8N or componon S 50/2.8 etc

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Adirondacks
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,381
    Quote Originally Posted by hoojammyflip View Post
    yep, referring to the common 4 group 6 element design of Nikkor 50/2.8N or componon S 50/2.8 etc
    That is the double Gauss design as used in the 50/1.8 Zuiko. You'll find them with 7 elements too, the 7 element f:1.4 Zuiko is also a dG.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin