Olympus OM: Preferred lenses

Ok, to be succinct: Zuiko 50mm's are rated by their serial number, their markings and their front ring color. Old ones are single coated and that's usually denoted by their chrome front ring. They have lower contrast and a more classic rendition. Newer ones have a black front ring and their serial numbers are higher, and they're labelled MC for multicoated. Supposedly the best zuiko 50mm is the black ring model, with serial over 1mill, and they're not labelled MC, just zuiko.

As for the 28's, the 28mm f2 is supposedly very very good, the f2.8 is still rated highly, but slower. Once again you get the chrome and black ring for SC and MC. Newer models will be higher contrast and less hazy, especially wide open. The f2 version specifically has a floating element so is very consistent in sharpness at all distances.
 
Well - you've selected a good kit.

I'd recommend the 28/3.5, and a 50/1.4 that has a serial number greater than 1,100,000 (not certain of the exact cut-off number, but the later versions of that lens get better reviews on-line). Given a choice between an early 50/1.4 and a late 50/1.8 (made in Japan), I would heartily recommend the 50/1.8 - while cheap, it is a stellar lens.

But, you must be very, very careful. Zuikos sitting in the camera bag are always calling out for some more of their buddies to join them. :)
 
Good to know. Thanks-- this line of cameras/lenses seem to be very highly regarded and equally confusing.

Also, is there a 50mm f/1.2? I assume so, but was more wondering if it's any good, say compared to the Nikkor 50mm f/1.2

Ultimately, I am going after a black OM-1 or 2 with a 28mm f/2 and 50mm f/1.2 over the next year. Are there any difference between the OM-1 or OM-2 (like viewfinder, etc) ?
 
Last edited:
The 28mm f2.8 is very sharp, I have two of them. The 28mm f2 is said to be very good too, and offers the f2 aperture, but it is expensive. The f2.8 can be had for less than $100 in nice condition. There is also a 28mm f3.5, which I have not used. It is cheap, typically $50 in nice condition. It has long had a reputation for not being as good as many other OM lenses, but lately, I have seen a lot of people online praising it. I think I'd go for the f2.8 if you don't want to pay the $350 or so the f2 lens costs. The 2.8 is fairly cheap, very sharp, and easy to find, and easy to focus.

The 50/1.4 was made in several versions because it was made the whole time the OM system was made. The best is the last version ,whose serial numbers are 1,100,000 and higher. I have two of them and one with a serial in the 600,000 range. The lower numbered one is not nearly as good wide open and has harsher bokeh.

The 50mm f2 Macro OM lens is the sharpest 50 that Olympus made. Mike Johnston from the online photographer says its one of the sharpest 50s ever made by anyone, ever. I agree. I have one, and it is incredibly sharp, even wide open, and it focuses to 1:2 without an extension tube (1:1 with a 25mm extension tube). It has better bokeh than any of the f1,4 zuiko 50s, but it costs $500 or more used.
 
There is a 55mm f1.2 and a 50mm f1.2

The 50 is the newer lens, it was made in the 80s, the 55 in the 70s. The 50 is sharper wide open, harder to find, and expensive.
 
Chriscrawfordphoto said:
There is also a 28mm f3.5, which I have not used. It is cheap, typically $50 in nice condition. It has long had a reputation for not being as good as many other OM lenses, but lately, I have seen a lot of people online praising it.
Click to expand...

FWIW, I tested a 28mm f3.5 on a 5d a while ago, and pitted it against a 17-40mm f4L at 28mm, and the zuiko blew the L zoom into the weeds. It was sharp wide open at f3.5, had lower distortion, cooler color rendition, and even at f11 was quite a bit sharper in the corners. Very good lens.
 
filmfan said:
Also, is there a 50mm f/1.2? I assume so, but was more wondering if it's any good, say compared to the Nikkor 50mm f/1.2
Click to expand...

Here you go:

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/olympusom1n2/shared/zuiko/index.htm

All the zuiko lenses (including the unicorn-like 85mm f1.4 zuiko - which would have been one of the most interesting lenses for SLR systems if more than 15 or so had been made) are on that site.

As for the 50mm f1.2 - I'd rate it similar to the nikkor f1.2, which is to say that it's very good lens, but not a fantastic lens like the canon 1.2L's. It is quite a bit smaller than the nikkor and canon though.
 
Last edited:
Unless you're fanatical about lens performance I wouldn't shy away from the early 50mm f1.4. I used one for a couple of years until I stumbled over the later version, it came with an OM-2 kit I bought. I was perfectly satisfied with the earlier one and although I now tend to choose the later one I can't really see much difference aside from a tad less sharpness at f1.4. I think the earlier version is nicer for black and white!

The 85mm f2 is also worth having IMO ... it's a superb portrait lens.
 
marcr1230 said:
my vote is for an 85 2.0 - it's magical
Click to expand...


I have an early 90mm f2 Summicron and did some comparative portraits with it and the 85mm f2 Zuiko ... both at f2. I actually preferred the look of the Olympus lens ... it was less clinical IMO.
 
filmfan said:
I will probably just end up with an early 50mm 1.4 to tell the truth.
Click to expand...



They're really cheap ... mine came from eBay for around $50.00 from memory and although it's been very well used (and looks like it) the glass is perfect aside from a little internal dust.
 
After finding the OM series, that is all I shoot with... if I didnt have my my xpan I would be banned from this site :)
My choices:
50 1.4 - any year.
50 1.2 - big and heavy compared to the 1.4, but I love having that extra speed.
28 2 - perfect lens at all apertures - great focal length on the OM.
100 2.8 - a tiny lens that gives nice reach, most people would never know you had a 100mm lens on.
 
The 2/28, 2/21, 3.5/21, and 2/100 are the most stand out daily user lenses in the Zuiko set IMHO . I owned the 2/90 for a while As well. Close focus not being my thing really the 2/100 was better for me. I still use the 2/28 and 2/21 as my primary wides on my 5 Diesel ii. My copy was in a hackers kit me thinks before I bought it. I definitely can see the cleaning marks left by an old Grateful Dead t-shirt on The front element. No worries though it still does what it should. The perfect reflex wide.
 
The holy grail of Zuiko lenses for me was the 50mm f1.2 ... I couldn't rest until I had one! :D

When you consider the comparative cost of OM gear generally though, the 50mm 1.2 has Noctilux pricing ... mine cost me $500.00! :eek:
 
Zuiko 28/2 is a great lens. It is very sharp yet has a distinctive liquid quality to its rendering. 50/2 macro is also a wonderful lens, sharp with beautiful bokeh, although a lot larger and heavier than the 50/1.8 lenses. 50/2 macro on an OM body (w/o winder or motor drive) has a problem mounting on certain tripod heads, given the thickness of the lens.

50/1.8 lenses in all versions are very good to excellent lenses -- really excellent when compared to their prices.
 
Relatively new zuikohead here - whilst I have some 50s, usually I carry with me just the 28mm / f3.5 which is stellar and very compact and the therrific 85mm/f2 which is to my eye somehow more of a "normal" lens than the 50. Maybe a combo 35+85 would be the best, but somehow I don't care about the gap in focal lengths.
 
Isn't there a highly regarded 24mm? The other one I have which is great is the 50 3.5 macro which can serve as an ordinary 50 as well. The 100 2.8 is my next one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom