OM, I've become a Zuikoholic!

[shadowfox]

OM. After years and years of having shot only Nikon and Leica R film SLRs, I am now absolutely in love with an OM4. Looking forward to buy some Zuiko glass, as I have just a 50/1.4.
For the knowledgeable Zuikoholics here, is the 35/2 a lot better lens than the 35/2.8? The 35/2 is hard to find where I live...
Thanks in advance.

If you get a chance to pick up a 35/2, do it.

I am tired showing my pictures from it and asking anyone to point out what part is soft or low-contrast or whatever. No one ever bother to back up what they *hear* vs what they actually know.

That lens is a gem. If you get bad pictures from a copy that is not broken inside, then you're doing something wrong.

 

[Keith]

Softness and contrast are all subjective IMO Will ... I really like the way it renders and I also like the size of it. Sharpness is not a big priority for me and contrast is at the user's discretion in post if you have a hybrid work flow. I would definitely recommend the 35mm f2 to anyone.

What lenses did I get from you ... I can't remember?

 

[redisburning]

If you get a chance to pick up a 35/2, do it.

I am tired showing my pictures from it and asking anyone to point out what part is soft or low-contrast or whatever. No one ever bother to back up what they *hear* vs what they actually know.

That lens is a gem. If you get bad pictures from a copy that is not broken inside, then you're doing something wrong.

I dont think anyone believes it to be a bad lens, it's just that for what you are going to spend on one, you might get more utility getting the 28/2, which is, IMO, simply more good.

I have both the 35/2.8 and the 28/3.5. Personally I was never dissatisfied with either. WIthout having real tests for them, my impression is that the 35/2.8 is more practical and sharp enough, and that with the 28/3.5 if it's in focus it's sharp, period.

 

[shadowfox]

Softness and contrast are all subjective IMO Will ... I really like the way it renders and I also like the size of it. Sharpness is not a big priority for me and contrast is at the user's discretion in post if you have a hybrid work flow. I would definitely recommend the 35mm f2 to anyone.

What lenses did I get from you ... I can't remember?

Sure, Keith.

What lens? I think you got the 24/2.8 from me. Have you ever used it? 🙂

 

[shadowfox]

I dont think anyone believes it to be a bad lens, it's just that for what you are going to spend on one, you might get more utility getting the 28/2, which is, IMO, simply more good.

I have both the 35/2.8 and the 28/3.5. Personally I was never dissatisfied with either. WIthout having real tests for them, my impression is that the 35/2.8 is more practical and sharp enough, and that with the 28/3.5 if it's in focus it's sharp, period.

It depends, I find myself liking either 35mm or 24mm as wide focal lengths. I use 28mm only on cameras that I absolute love like XA4 and Ricoh GR1s.

I have both 35/2 and 24/2 Zuikos, I am done in the wide-department unless a 21/2 floats along with the price tag that I can swallow 🙂

 

[dtcls100]

I've basically found all my Zuiko wideangles (21/2, 24/2.8, 24 shift, 28/2, 35/2) to be really good to excellent. Just need to use them some more, as I've been obsessed lately with shooting a Tamron SP 35-80 I recently picked up. Nice image quality and alot smaller and lighter than my Zuiko 35-80/2.8. Also been shooting alot with Tamron SP 80-200mm and Tamron SP 17mm. It's a phase, probably will get back to shooting the Zuikos more again once the weather gets nicer. I really don't like to get the Zuikos wet! Of course that conveniently justifies buying used Tamron SP lenses off of the Bay! Rationalization is a force of nature . . . .

 

[DanOnRoute66]

I've found the Vivitar Series 1 70-210mm f3.5 to be one of the few aftermarket lenses that's up to the quality of the Zuiko glass. In fact, I think this lens is way better than the Zuiko 75-150mm zoom, in terms of sharpness and color rendering.

 

[bgb]

.... and I'm a Zuikoholic too!

.... and I'm a Zuikoholic too!

I have been led astray by this thread and as a result an OM-2 is now mine.

I have been offered two lenses at a good price and was wondering which you all might think was the 'better'... I know it depends on shooting style ... I usually use a 50mm and I'm quite happy to continue to do so. I think the 35mm is more like me but I'm happy to listen to any and all arguments.

Olympus Zuiko Auto-W 28mm f2.8 ~ very light cleaning/rub marks on front element.

Olympus Zuiko Auto-W 35mm f2.8 ~ chrome nose, Nice!

Just a little OT but why are these lovely cameras in the Clunky Forum, they are small, quieter and lighter than my GSN?

 

[Keith]

I'd definitely go with the 35mm f2.8 ... you can do a lot with a 35mm IMO. I'm an habitual 50mm shooter too but my next choice would always be a 35mm in preference to a 28mm.

 

[DanOnRoute66]

Generally speaking, bgb, I'd say go with the 28mm, assuming the glass isn't too marked up. I like to go roughly half and double of the 50mm lens. The 35mm focal length just isn't that much wider than a 50mm.

 

[Fuchs]

Thank you to everyone, I will buy a cheap local 35/2.8, and asap I have a chance i'll get my hands on the first 35/2 that comes close.

Meanwhile, i have found an autofocus 24/2.8 Zuiko that I bought for a song. BTW, there was also an OM-88 attached to the rear of the lens, a clunky horrible looking plasteroid camera, but that came basically for free. Let's say I had everything for about US $20. Does anyone know if the optical formula/rendering/performance of this AF-Zuiko is somewhere near to its manual focus sibling?

 

[shadowfox]

Meanwhile, i have found an autofocus 24/2.8 Zuiko that I bought for a song. BTW, there was also an OM-88 attached to the rear of the lens, a clunky horrible looking plasteroid camera, but that came basically for free. Let's say I had everything for about US $20. Does anyone know if the optical formula/rendering/performance of this AF-Zuiko is somewhere near to its manual focus sibling?

I have no idea, but you could educate us regarding this since you now have one to test. The 24/2.8 is a darling of a lens in manual focus, I suspect Olympus cut a bunch of cost with the AF version, but it still may have the same formulation, so definitely test it, I for one would like to see how good it is.

Btw, that's a pretty rare find, most OM-AF I see came with the usual 50/1.8 lens. Or mega-slow zoom.

 

[Jani_from_Finland]

Yes, it's true...

my signature tells it ...

 

[Darkhorse]

I'd hate to say that but I'm doing some spring cleaning, and some major simplifying in my life. Almost all of my OMs are going to go. HOWEVER, I will be keeping ONE Zuiko lens for use on a Canon EOS... that being the 2.8 100mm.

 

[DanOnRoute66]

I'd hate to say that but I'm doing some spring cleaning, and some major simplifying in my life. Almost all of my OMs are going to go. HOWEVER, I will be keeping ONE Zuiko lens for use on a Canon EOS... that being the 2.8 100mm.

So when are you putting your stuff in the classifieds? 😎

 

[DanOnRoute66]

Are there any pros/cons between the OM-1 and OM-2 ?

The OM-2N will do everything the OM-1N will do in terms of manual exposure, plus the 2N has aperture-preferred automatic exposure. Keep in mind that the 2N has limited use if the batteries are dead. On the other hand, the 2N has superb TTL flash exposure control with the T-20, T-32 and T-45 flashes that the 1N doesn't. Just depends on how much automation you want. Both cameras are very reliable.

 

[Darkhorse]

So when are you putting your stuff in the classifieds? 😎

It's right here: http://www.rangefinderforum.com/pho...m-cameras-2c-lenses26amp-3b-accessories/cat/3

Not much interest in them, though. I was going to take em down to a used camera place along with my darkroom equipment* and sell em where some students might be able to make good use out of them.

*I got an enlarger to re-educate myself and move through a large backlog of negs. There's a large local darkroom that's just a better facility than my bathroom that I'll feel more comfortable with now.

 

[Keith]

Are there any pros/cons between the OM-1 and OM-2 ?

An OM-1 is the purist's choice! Everything you need to take great photos but nothing more ... it really is the M3 of SLRs IMO!

My black OM-1 is one camera they will have to take from my cold dead hands! 😛

For ease of use though it's hard to beat an OM-2 ... the metering is amazing!

 

[j.scooter]

OM2 Zuiko 200 f4 Portra 400VC (expired)

OM 2 Zuiko 200 f4 Portra 400vc (expired)

OM2 Zuiko 24 2.8 Portra 400VC expired

 

[illuminati_02]

I swear this place is trouble...
For the 2nd time in several years I have started "trolling" here again, both times coming here with 1 camera and 1 lens. Now I have 12 cameras and 24 lenses, with Zuikos being the most recent acquisitions.. a 35/2, 50/1.2, and 85/2 no less.
You bunch are great at inciting lust and GAS... I hope that you are proud of yourselves.
Now what the heck am I supposed to do with 12 cameras???