OM, I've become a Zuikoholic!

Olympus OM2n with Zuiko 28 f/3.5
ilford HP5+ in HC110
Scan11870sm.JPG
 
So the last reason I still have my Nikon F2 is the 55/3.5 macro. I use it as a walkaround lens for street and landscape.

I'm wondering if the 50/3.5 Zuiko is up to the job, its likely the same formula (5/4 Xenotar) but all reviews I've seen don't mention infinity use, not much on Flickr either.

If anyone here has any experience to share I'm all ears. :cool:
 
The OM 50 f3.5 macro has an automatic correction lens group that compensates for close distance aberrations. It is a wonderfully small lens, that extends (with a long 330 degree throw) to achieve 1/2 life size reproduction. Not too shabby for 1972. I can't speak specifically to the Nikkor, but the OM 50 can be used as a slow 50mm walk-around lens with no real limitations. I think in practice (especially hand held) both lenses are able to produce results that are wonderfully sharp. The close focusing design of the Olympus must have been pretty good as Nikon would go on to emulate it in the redesign of their 50 macro (the f2.8 AI-s) in the late 70's.
 
To OM2n users - can anyone share how they use the auto mode? I've never shot an electronic camera without AE lock before, so I guess I need to learn how to make liberal use of the exposure comp dial.

Its just a foreign way of shooting to me, do you meter the shadows then subject and dial in the difference in compensation? Or does the OTF metering take up pretty much all the slack?



Any tricks & tips welcome.
 
OTF measurement does not help you with unusual dark and light scenery. Its main advantage is flash measurement and varying lighting during exposure (time exposure).
I would just use manual compensation in that case. Scene is lighter than average grey: +1, scene is darker than average grey: -1.
Actually, if I really believe I need to think exposure through, I'd use the manual mode.
 
AlexBG said:
Is there much difference between a silver nose om 50 1.4 and the all black MC ones?
Click to expand...


The MC one has higher contrast and is a bit sharper wide open. I have only used silvernosed ones and i love them, especially with b&w film. The one i currently have is in the 350xxx serial number.
On digital they don't perform very well - wide open you can get a lot of aberrations like this in high contrast scenes (pic taken wide open).

66646646_10157106644820772_5231768395619237888_n.jpg



With more even light you get lovely pictures, here is another one taken at f/1.4

IMG_0689s.JPG



Closing down to f/2 you see a big improvement - it is sharper than the 50 f/1.8 "Made in Japan" at the same aperture (I had both). Here is a picture at f/2.

IMG_9901.JPG



But this lens is made for film, i much prefer the silvernosed lenses for b&w. Here another one wide open.

32170411391_616daa320c_o.jpg



By f/5.6 it is so sharp that you can cut your fingers with the print. Here is a picture taken at f/5.6.

Scan11405sm.jpg


I'd love to get my hands on a MC one but i have to say that I like the silvernose one so much that i don't feel like spending any money to get a MC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom