Olympus OM 50mm F1.8

[David Jones]

I have some scanned prints that were made at the same place from similar quality 200 asa film negs. One is the one I posted earlier from the Olympus (steam loco). The others are zeiss 1.7 with tripod, Yashica ML 1.9 and Canon 100mm f2.8. I scanned them on the same settings on the same scanner to compare. Can you tell which is which apart from the Olympus which I'm sure isn't quite so good?

 

[JPD]

View attachment 54894 View attachment 54895 View attachment 54896 View attachment 54897

I have some scanned prints that were made at the same place from similar quality 200 asa film negs. One is the one I posted earlier from the Olympus (steam loco). The others are zeiss 1.7 with tripod, Yashica ML 1.9 and Canon 100mm f2.8. I scanned them on the same settings on the same scanner to compare. Can you tell which is which apart from the Olympus which I'm sure isn't quite so good?

This isn't easy with different motifs and probably different apertures used, but I'll give it a go:

1. Zeiss
2. Canon
3. Yashica
4. Olympus

 

[JPD]

sharp vs razor sharp... To make such statement, you need to compare lenses in the exact same situation and on various circumstances, and to eliminate any variable which could distort the result. Then you can be affirmative.

In you case and as you wrote, you did not compared a Zuiko with a Xenar but an OM20 SLR + a Zuiko vs a Retina + a Xenar which is not exactly the same thing.

take care.

You're right about that, of course. But when you use a lens for a while you'll get the feel of the overall image quality. I prefer my Retinas with Xenar and Heligon 50/2.8 over the Olympus OM with 50/1.8 Zuiko for "everyday picture taking".

 

[David Jones]

JPD- I think about cameras the same way. I just see how they work in all kinds of situations. You didn't get the photo order quite right. The first pic is actually the Yashica hand held although I was resting my elbows on the next bike along. That lens would work well at certain apertures but could look pretty soft on dull days. Using a tripod it could be excellent. The ML F1.7 version that my brother has is perhaps better. The zeiss is the third pic. Large apertures were good on this lens. This pic of a dog shows this well.

 

[250swb]

I don't think anything is learned by straight scans with no post processing. The scanned image shouldn't be about what it is, but what it could be. It is what darkroom work, and now scanning work, is all about, post processing to achieve the goal. All sorts of things come into play to confuse the issue with a straight scan, such as the inherent contrast of some lenses rather than the inherent sharpness of others. And often contrast is confused with sharpness, like the Zeiss have an inherent contrasty 'pop', while Leica and Olympus lenses are less show off and concentrate on sharpness and rendering. I can't see anything in the original steam engine picture that couldn't be rectified by some post processing of the image.

Steve

 

[thuggins]

Never make any judgements based on a negative scan. Get something printed.

Never make judgements on any scan or print. Shoot slides.

I have about a half dozen 50f1.8's. They are all good lenses. On one occassion I did compare the earlier versions to the MIJ, and the MIJ was noticeably sharper. In fact, I stopped using the MIJ because it kept cutting my fingers.

 

[JPD]

JPD- I think about cameras the same way. I just see how they work in all kinds of situations. You didn't get the photo order quite right. The first pic is actually the Yashica hand held although I was resting my elbows on the next bike along.

I have a collection of Rollei TLR's, Retinas and folders, different models and different lenses, and when I have learned how they behave in different situations I pick the camera I feel suits me and the situation for the day. A simpler three element lens can have a certain "something".

One interesting camera is the Zeiss Ikon Box Tengor, that I hope to buy some day. It has a two element achromatic lens, but if you look at pictures taken with one (plenty of them on the net), you can easily fool someone and say that they were taken with a Leica and Summicron.

That Yashica lens is pretty good, and the dog portrait taken with Planar is nice. The shallow depth of field and suspicious gaze gives the portrait character.