OM, I've become a Zuikoholic!

Wow, yes, a 90/2 is a real gem of an acquisition.

Apparently, as well as being superb at macro distances, it's also a very good all-round short tele.

You clearly are going to be enjoying yourself with that lot :)
 
Just FYI, I started a thread over at APUG on my long-term impressions of the 90/2.0 Macro, with plenty of examples (and others have also contributed), you may want to have a look:

http://www.apug.org/forums/forum52/65556-om-zuiko-90mm-f-2-0-macro-long-term-impressions.html

The 90/2.0 is no mere lens, it's one of those rare examples (like most Leica M lenses) that seems to define the lens maker's art. It is simply exquisite, which is why a second-hand example of this 1980s lens costs more than a new modern ~100mm Macro with electronic image stabilisation and focus that goes to 1:1 (the 90/2.0 only magnifies to 1:2). And having both in hand, I must say that the Zuiko 90/2.0 is built far better (feels more expensive, more solid, more jewel-like) than a $3000 Schneider Super-Angulon XL 90mm f/5.6, the only other lens I own which I would classify as "exquisite" or [insert similar over-the-top hyperbole here].
 
philosomatographer said:
Just FYI, I started a thread over at APUG on my long-term impressions of the 90/2.0 Macro, with plenty of examples (and others have also contributed), you may want to have a look:

http://www.apug.org/forums/forum52/65556-om-zuiko-90mm-f-2-0-macro-long-term-impressions.html

The 90/2.0 is no mere lens, it's one of those rare examples (like most Leica M lenses) that seems to define the lens maker's art. It is simply exquisite, which is why a second-hand example of this 1980s lens costs more than a new modern ~100mm Macro with electronic image stabilisation and focus that goes to 1:1 (the 90/2.0 only magnifies to 1:2). And having both in hand, I must say that the Zuiko 90/2.0 is built far better (feels more expensive, more solid, more jewel-like) than a $3000 Schneider Super-Angulon XL 90mm f/5.6, the only other lens I own which I would classify as "exquisite" or [insert similar over-the-top hyperbole here].
Click to expand...


I consider myself quite lucky to have purchased my 90/2.0 for an affordable price on eBay, due to it having a small chip in one of the glass elements. Such a mark will, of course, never visibly affect the image, so I am happy, and got it for at least $500 cheaper than the going rate for mint copies.
Click to expand...


Ok ... shock me!

What is the going price for one of these wonder lenses ... I need to know now! :p
 
Keith said:
What is the going price for one of these wonder lenses ... I need to know now! :p
Click to expand...

Rarity, more than price, make them difficult to acquire. They seem to go from about $800 to $1100 in the second-hand market. Not big money for a lens in absolute terms, but not cheap for a 1980s Macro as part of an obsolete system either.
 
Ugh I'm really hoping it's the 90 f/2.0 Macro now, imagine if it's a different lens haha. But, the lenses there seemed to be in great condition, filters mounted and stored in their original containers. But, I'll shut up now until I can show you guys a picture of the stuff (hopefully next weekend or so).
 
90 f/2.0 Macro on eBay yesterday and didn't sell at £675. The seller sold a similar one for £605 about a week ago. All very temping ....

jesse
 
Hi everyone. It's been nearly 2 months since I've really done any photography. I was going strong and things just sort of sputtered out. I processed my first roll in a while from my OM1 with some Arista Premium 400 pushed to 1600. I think I need a new reel though, the negs didn't come out looking so good all covered with emulsion in certain areas because the reel just loved to buckle.
 
The 300/4.5 is a very nice piece of glass. I use it quite frequently. For sizing, the camera on the left has the 300 mounted:

3172307179_27eff341eb_o.jpg
 
Wow, that's a lot of good looking OM equipment! That lens on the bottom right looks like a monster...what is it?
 
PatrickT said:
Wow, that's a lot of good looking OM equipment! That lens on the bottom right looks like a monster...what is it?
Click to expand...
This would be my extremely beloved 100mm F2! :D
Just to finish off the others, upper left is the 16mm, next to it is the 21mm/F2, followed by the 18mm and a 50mm/F1.8 MIJ. Bottom row is the 300mm/F4.5, 35/F2 and the 28mm/F2.
 
Yes, the 300/4.5 is a great lens. I have made sharp
shots handheld at low speeds where I didn't expect success. Partly dumb luck, but it's also well-balanced.
 
You made me pickup my OM2 and compare it to the Zeiss Ikon ZM! They're about the same size/weight with 50/1.8 F-Zuiko and the C-Sonnar 50/1.5 attached...

If only I could focus SLR cameras properly...Olympus' microprisms help a lot though I have to say. Such a delicious camera, compact, quiet, accurate, just about a perfect SLR. A lot of thought and craft went into that camera.

Even though I'm supposed to have the bad 50/1.8 (no "made in japan" on the lens) it's stellar. Beautiful rendition and 3D effect...
 
Martin: "Bad"???? Even the softer F.Zuiko silver nose has it's charms. It has a colour/contrast balance that is wonderful for certain subjects ... viz, skintones on Kodachrome, Reala, etc. :D
 
morback said:
...If only I could focus SLR cameras properly...Olympus' microprisms help a lot though I have to say....
Click to expand...

You might take a look at a 1-14 screen or if you want a brighter view a 2-13. The 13 is like the 14 but has a straight split level where as the 13 is a 45 degree slant. You will need to adjust your meter for the 2-13 if you are using an OM-1/2 from what I remember reading. The 14 is like the Nikon P Screen with is my all time favorite.

B2 (;->
 
Bill, 1-13 is the standard focussing screen with horizontal split circle. Then there is 1-1 with only microprism and I believe it's 1-14 with the split circle at 45°.

There is one more screen with microprism only for long/slow lenses where the microprism doesn't darken until about f/8.

Looking at Larry's collection I'm glad I have the common 100/2.8 and not the f/2 version. I'm sure it must be great re. IQ, but the size...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom