gavinlg
Veteran
Chris - thankyou for the compliment, I sure enjoyed flicking through the stuff on your website.
Any one got any 1.4 samples to post?
Any one got any 1.4 samples to post?
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
fdigital said:
I wish I did. Years ago I bought a 50/1.4 Zuiko. I remember thinking it wasn't quite as good as the Nikon AF-50/1.4 that I also have. The zuiko 1.4 I had didn't last long, I dropped it accidently and damaged the rear element
I later learned that the last series of Zuiko 1.4's made were supposed to be a lot better than the one I had. The best are the ones with a serial number higher than 1,100,000. Mine had a serial around 600,000, which is a very common serial range in the black-front Zuiko 50/1.4 The high serial number ones are somewhat rare, but fortunately most ebay sellers don't know the difference, so they sell for the same price as the lower-number ones. I have wanted one for a long time but money has been real short the last couple years. I still want to buy one someday.
nobbylon
Veteran
nobbylon
Veteran
nobbylon
Veteran
a japan 50 for sale at 5 euro on a site at mo!!!!
hans voralberg
Veteran
More 50/1.4 examples
I love the f1.8 as well, though mine is an early version
I love the f1.8 as well, though mine is an early version
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
The miJs are sharper than the F.Zuiko silvernose, but you may not be able to tell except under controlled tests. My silvernose (which has a fair amount of fungus and will get a good cleaning one of these days) served me very well. But I think the main difference is in the contrast and colour. The earliest silvernose 50s were single coated and had a bit lower contrast and, IIRC, maybe slightly warmer colour cast. It was a very pleasant balance for Kodachrome, especially. Later silvernose 50s had multicoating, I think, then there was the MC versions with black nose, the version just labelled "Japan" and no coating designation (though they were MC) and the miJ, all of which were multicoated. This is from memory, but I think it's reasonably correct. So there you have 5 versions of the Zuiko 50/1.8.
There were at least two versions of the 50/1.4, perhaps 3, with the "best" being SN => 660,000. There were two macro 50s, the 50/3.5 & 50/2, plus the 55/1.2 (with Lanthanar glass that is typically pretty yellowed by now) and the 50/1.2. The 50/2 Macro and 50/1.2 are probably the sharpest Zuiko 50s made, with the 50/3.5 & 50/1.8 a close second. Again, most of this is from a memory I admit to be no longer as infallible as I remember it to be ( ) ... I do think I need to have at least one sample of each.
There were at least two versions of the 50/1.4, perhaps 3, with the "best" being SN => 660,000. There were two macro 50s, the 50/3.5 & 50/2, plus the 55/1.2 (with Lanthanar glass that is typically pretty yellowed by now) and the 50/1.2. The 50/2 Macro and 50/1.2 are probably the sharpest Zuiko 50s made, with the 50/3.5 & 50/1.8 a close second. Again, most of this is from a memory I admit to be no longer as infallible as I remember it to be (
) ... I do think I need to have at least one sample of each.
hans voralberg
Veteran
I have the 50/2 and yes the thing is tack sharp. Still lusting for a 50/1.2. Btw my 1.8 is black nose but with no Japan nor coating designation, which version is it ?
kemal_mumcu
Well-known
Reading this thread is causing me depression.
When I first got my camera gifted to me by my grandpa at the age of 15 it came with the 55mm 1.2. Of course I didn't know what I had then and just used the thing for whatever I wanted to shoot. When I bought a digital P&S I gave away my lenses thinking that I would never use them again. :bang: I wasn't able to give away my OM3 body.
Since then I'm back to film and the Olympus gets a 1.8 to grace the front. It's a nice lens but I can only dream of the different shots I could be taking with the 1.2. Lesson learned.
When I first got my camera gifted to me by my grandpa at the age of 15 it came with the 55mm 1.2. Of course I didn't know what I had then and just used the thing for whatever I wanted to shoot. When I bought a digital P&S I gave away my lenses thinking that I would never use them again. :bang: I wasn't able to give away my OM3 body.
Since then I'm back to film and the Olympus gets a 1.8 to grace the front. It's a nice lens but I can only dream of the different shots I could be taking with the 1.2. Lesson learned.
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
Chris, thanks for starting this nostalgic thread.
Those who call the 50/1.8 "body cap" are probably the same people who call OM-1 a "rear lens cap"
This one from another cool 50mm Zuiko, the macro f3.5:
Those who call the 50/1.8 "body cap" are probably the same people who call OM-1 a "rear lens cap"
This one from another cool 50mm Zuiko, the macro f3.5:
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
shadowfox said:Chris, thanks for starting this nostalgic thread.
Those who call the 50/1.8 "body cap" are probably the same people who call OM-1 a "rear lens cap"
This one from another cool 50mm Zuiko, the macro f3.5:
That's a cool flower photo. I have never tried the 3.5 macro. I have had a 50/2 macro for a long time but stragely enough have never used it for macro work (The little macro work I do is commercial stuff and I shoot Digital for that using Nikon). The f2 macro is ultra sharp but I prefer the 50/1.8 for general use since the Zuiko f2 macro is so huge and heavy. The 3.5 is nice and small!
About nostalgia, The lens I used for the photos in this thread are the last version of the Zuiko 50mm f1.8, and its still 21 years old. I got it new when i was 11 yrs old and i'm now 32. Its an antique; most of our Zuiko OM lenses are antiques now, and they still equal and sometimes outperform modern lenses for systems like Nikon AF and Canon EOS that are still in production.
Dektol Dan
Well-known
Cheap yes, crappy no.
Cheap yes, crappy no.
The body cap Zuikos are better than the often highly touted comparable and new VC lenses on this site.
Cheap yes, crappy no.
The body cap Zuikos are better than the often highly touted comparable and new VC lenses on this site.
Igor.Burshteyn
Well-known
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
Does it say "F.ZUIKO" on the front? If so, it is likely the multi-coated but without the designation printed on the trim ring. Somewhere there's a guide, I think, to the various iterations of Zuiko 50s, but I don't have it bookmarked.hans voralberg said:
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
fdigital said:
Tri-X @ 1600, Rodinal
100% crop
hans voralberg
Veteran
Trius said:
Yup it does, just curious, I dont care that much about variation
ferider
Veteran
Taken with a 1.4 and 7mm extension:
and the 50/3.5:
The most phenomenal Zuiko "body cap" is the 28/3.5:
(two pics stiched together in PS)
and the 50/3.5:
The most phenomenal Zuiko "body cap" is the 28/3.5:
(two pics stiched together in PS)
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
I sold my 28/3.5 body cap to a member in the UK, so I now use my 28/2.8 when I need a 28mm body cap.
50/1.4 body cap, wide open
50/1.4 body cap + Vivitar 2x Macro adapter
Edit: And 28/2.8 body cap
50/1.4 body cap, wide open
50/1.4 body cap + Vivitar 2x Macro adapter
Edit: And 28/2.8 body cap
Last edited:
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
Trius said:I sold my 28/3.5 body cap to a member in the UK, so I now use my 28/2.8 when I need a 28mm body cap.
50/1.4 body cap, wide open
50/1.4 body cap + Vivitar 2x Macro adapter
Edit: And 28/2.8 body cap
I don't know if I'd consider a 50/1.4 or a 28/2.8 to be body caps just cause they're more expensive than the under-$20 50/1.8
But, they're very sharp lenses too. I have a couple 28/2.8's and they're sharper in my opinion than the 28/2.8D Af-Nikkor I use on my digital cameras.
gavinlg
Veteran
My 28 f3.5 is quite a bit sharper in the corners, and has less distortion than my 17-40 f4L when tested on a 5d. It's also about 1/8th the size. Pretty cool if you ask me!