Best Oly OM 50?

ChrisN

ChrisN

Striving
Local time
4:38 AM
Joined
Apr 6, 2005
Messages
4,496
Question for all you Oly fans: I have my original 50/1.8 that came with my OM10 many years ago.It's an F.Zuiko Auto-S Made in Japan model. Compared with my Leica and Pentax lenses it's a bit lacking in the sharpness/resolution and bokeh departments. (I was perfectly happy with it before I discovered this place!)

Is there any particular model amongst the 50/1.8 that is sharper? How about the other 50's? I'll be using it on an OM2n and exclusively for B&W.
 
The "made in Japan" version is supposed to be the best. The MIJ-version usually came with the OM10 model. I have one, and I have to say it's razor sharp.
 
I've had several multicoated Zuiko 50/1.8 lenses with various cameras (with various front-ring letterings) and I really couldn't tell any difference between them - I think it's an exceptionally good 50.

But my favourite is a Zuiko 50/1.4 "silvernose" (single coated). It's hard to pin down exactly what I like about it, but its general rendering is very pleasing to me. One could be had pretty reasonably and resold if you don't like it, so I'd suggest getting one and trying it.
 
I echo what Oscroft says. I have two 1.8's (one came with my OM10 the other with my OM40) and they are superbly sharp and a joy to work with, but it's the siren call of the 1.4 silvernose that keeps calling out to me. I can't put my finger on it either but it just has that something, and is excellent with B & W.

Trust me, if you do buy one; you won't sell it. ;)
 
Of the 1.8 models, the one that has made in japan written on the front ring is the last generation of those lenses, and is considered the sharpest. It has horrid bokeh though. This version just says Zuiko, not f.Zuiko on the front ring. There were 5 versions of this lens.

Of the 1.4 models, the last generation, serial over 1,100,000 is the best by far and has considerably better sharpness and bokeh than earlier ones. I have tried a couple of the earlier generations and can confirm that from my use. There were 5 versions of this lens.

The absolute sharpest Zuiko 50 is the 50mm f2 macro, which I also have. It has prety decent bokeh and extremely high sharpness, but it is very large and hard to focus for candid work because the middle-to-far distances on the focus ring are bunched up super close together to allow enough of the focus travel to be used for the macro range. It focuses to 1:2.
 
I have 50mm f1.8 silver nose, 50mm f1.4 (MC, >1M serial#), 50mm f3.5 macro and 50mm f2 macro. Each of them is better lens than I am a photographer :) Sharpest is f3.5 macro I believe. f1.8 still amazes me for what it delivers per cost. f1.4 or f2 macro are best walkaround lenses for me.
 
Boo Hoo... Only number 404840

Boo Hoo... Only number 404840

So I guess my Zuiko 14 serial number under 1.1Mil is a POS. I just went and jerked it off my OM1 and threw it in the garbage. Funny, I always thought it was pretty good when I looked at the pix. Guess I'll start using the 1.8 instead.

Thanks for the heads up guys.
 
I have printed large from both an early 1.4 and a late (MIJ) 1.8 , late 1.8 gives more "modern" contrast, the 1.4 seems "smoother"

Both lenses are sharp enough, though the 1.4 is a bit dusty inside.

I have several 1.8 lenses in different variations and different coatings. I believe the later ones are a different optical design and seem more "plasticky"
 
kuzano said:
So I guess my Zuiko 14 serial number under 1.1Mil is a POS. I just went and jerked it off my OM1 and threw it in the garbage. Funny, I always thought it was pretty good when I looked at the pix. Guess I'll start using the 1.8 instead.

Thanks for the heads up guys.
Click to expand...


Sometimes I wonder about people. No one said your older 1.4 was a POS. We said the newer ones are better. You may not see much difference if you never shoot wide open...the version you have is extremely sharp stopped down but is not as sharp wide open as the newer ones. In addition to my >1.1million model, I have one with a serial of 6xxxxx and it is probably similar to yours.
 
Chriscrawfordphoto said:
Sometimes I wonder about people. No one said your older 1.4 was a POS. We said the newer ones are better. You may not see much difference if you never shoot wide open...the version you have is extremely sharp stopped down but is not as sharp wide open as the newer ones. In addition to my >1.1million model, I have one with a serial of 6xxxxx and it is probably similar to yours.
Click to expand...

MAN! I gotta start learning to use those emoticons. Humor and sarcasm simply do not survive internet communications. I'm very happy with my G.Zuiko 1.4.

It is becoming clear to me that RRF is more about gear than I might have imagined. You folks know way too much about your gear. Serial number iterations.... TMI... I just want to take pictures with reasonably good, and reliable equipment. :D:D:D:D
 
leicasniper said:
LOL. kuzano, this is a gear forum, owned by a guy who sells gear! So, get on board, man. ;) Memorize those serial numbers. There will be a test.
Click to expand...

I actually learned the differences in the Zuiko lens generations recently from the very nice people on the OM Email List, which I joined last year. They kept talking about the >1,100,000 50/1.4 so I picked one up on ebay cheap and tried it. It was a great improvement in Bokeh and wide-open sharpness on the older one. I like it.

I'm a professional fine art photographer. This is all I do, so yes, gear matters. It matters to all artists, because it makes a difference in the look of the final image. Before someone dimwit trying to look witty jumps in to say that painters don't talk about or care about different brushes, etc I am going to let you know that painters DO care about and talk about such things. When I was an art student at Indiana University, I took painting classes from three nationally known painters. All of them talked to us about different types and brands of brushes and which are best and why. They also talked about different paint brands and why professionals choose certain ones over others. I remember one prof cathing a student using 'student grade' paints (cheap paints that have less pigment than professional quality paints...several artist's paint makers sell a cheaper student line). We were not to use them because we were training to be professionals, and were expected to use professional materials, and the prof told the student exactly that.

I'm not a gear fondler; I actually own and use very little equipment compared to most professional photographers and compared to most RFF members. Most people here are hobbyists who are well off financially, and they spend their money on cameras. I am poor. I make enough to live, and barely so. most of my gear was given to me by people who liked my work enough to help me obtain the tools i needed to produce it. I have been careful to pick out the best things for my work and stick to those things. The purchase of the 50/1.4 with the 'good' serial number was a rare spur of the moment thing when I had a little extra $$$ and I decided to buy myself a little gift.
 
I agree the 50/2 macro is big and hard to focus quickly, especially on my OM-1. Looks small on my Canon 5D though.
 
I just bought a 50mm f1.2 but I can't tell you much about it ... it only got here today! :p

I shot a picture of a wall with vertical lines recently and was surprised at the barrel distortion of my f1.8. :eek:

KeelOM110608002.jpg
 
Thanks again all for the further information.

Keith - maybe the OM 50/1.2 on the OM2 will be the ticket as the backup to the M8 for gallery shoots! That lovely big viewfinder should be bright with a f/1.2 lens on the front. Full-frame too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom