Olympus OM Zoom Lenses

[KidA]

Any fellow OMers out there using either of the three wide-tele zooms on their OMs? The two

I've been shooting solely on the OM line for a while now and mostly used primes (28 f3.5, 50 f1.2, 85 f2 and one zoom; 65-200mm f4) and been very happy for the most part. I recently purchased a medium format system and that will be my go to camera. However, I will always carry a 35mm everywhere I go, but I don't want to carry around 3-4 lenses for that along with my new much bigger and heavier MF gear. One solution to this would be to buy one of the 'normal range' zooms: 35-70mm (one f3.6 the other f4) and the 35-80 f2.8. I'm just wondering if anyone has had any experiences with any of these (Or 2 or all 3!) of these zooms. I hear the 35-80 f2.8 is fantastic but it's also a little on the bigger side (not a huge deal) but super expensive... If I go for the 35-70 f4, will there be a huge difference in image quality? Hopefully the f3.6 will somewhat hold up to my current line-up. btw, don't be fooled by the little 28mm f3.5... it's a fantastic little lens.

Although I have a great MF system, I would still really appreciate great optics on 35mm if practical. I don't think I'll ever let go of the OM... what a great system.

 

[jovo]

There are a lot of factors that affect image quality other than the lens itself. Will you use a tripod, or handhold? How big will you want to enlarge your negatives? Generally, do you favor a wider angle or a narrower one? If you're also schlepping the MF system, what will you be using the 35mm for, and how crucial will some small difference in sharpness or contrast between one lens and another really be? If it were my decision, I'd expect to have a pretty well reasoned choice arise just by answering those questions.

 

[sagai]

I would take the 50mm 1.2 with me and that's all.

 

[KidA]

There are a lot of factors that affect image quality other than the lens itself. Will you use a tripod, or handhold? How big will you want to enlarge your negatives? Generally, do you favor a wider angle or a narrower one? If you're also schlepping the MF system, what will you be using the 35mm for, and how crucial will some small difference in sharpness or contrast between one lens and another really be? If it were my decision, I'd expect to have a pretty well reasoned choice arise just by answering those questions.

You bring up some good points, but I can assure you, I've considered these things you mention.

My main concern is in comparing the line up I currently have with the zoom lens I'm looking to replace with. I do both hand held and tripod, different size enlargements 4x5 - 11x14... Example: 50mm 1.2 on a tripod, enlarged to 8x10 print size: will it compare to 50mm setting on these zoom lenses? I know the aperture factor is huge in this particular example, but I rarely shoot more than f4-5.6.

I will still be using the 35mm for what I'm doing now... my goal is still a fine print... with all that 35mm grain glory. There are moments I want the look of MF and other times, I prefer the look of 35mm for the print. If I wanted a camera to just bring around with me solely for snapshots, I'd not worry about this and would just buy a $20 point and shoot. The MF is not replacing my 35mm work, it's simply an addition. I just can't justify bringing around with me two line ups of lenses with me when I'm out for a hike.

 

[Ricardo Miranda]

Right Kid, I'm sure you know there are a few more options for OM lenses in the range you want.
I use a 35-70mm /3.5-4.5 and a 28-48mm /4.
The 35-70mm is the last version made by Olympus. There is a later version /3.5-4.8 made by Cosina. Don't confuse booth.
It is a very nice and compact zoom. But, the 28-48mm is really nicer.

Of the other 2 35-70mm, I can only speak of the f4 version. It is a good zoom, but larger and heavier.

 

[mr rusty]

The 35-70 f4 I have is a good lens indeed. My walkaround. I also have the very small f3.5-4.5 but don't like it as much

an old post of mine. (there was a url link here which no longer exists)

 

[nsurit]

At one time or another I've found myself owning most of the Zuikos offered for the OM line. My most often used one lens kit would have your 85mm f2 attached to a single digit OM body. I know tis doesn't answer your question. A one zoom OM kit as a take along for my MF would probably have the 35-105 mm attached.

 

[wiltw]

Taken from: http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/olympusom1n2/shared/zuiko/htmls/3570mm.htm

"Zuiko AUTO-Zoom 35-70mm f/3.6

This lens is one of the original OM effort designed for the all popular 35-70mm focal length. Despite its long history in lens development, with its excellent lens handling characteristic and outstanding optical performance, this solidly made Zuiko optic is widely regarded as the best Zuiko 35-70mm lens produced thus far by Olympus and comparable to many top class wide-tele zooms made by rivaling brands."

I own this lens myself.

There is a rather rare 35-80mm f/2.8 ED zoom marketed primarily with the OM3Ti, and it is perhaps even higher performing than the OM 35-70 f/3.6...it should be, as its price was about $1100-1200 new!

 

[albada]

At one time or another I've found myself owning most of the Zuikos offered for the OM line. My most often used one lens kit would have your 85mm f2 attached to a single digit OM body. I know tis doesn't answer your question. A one zoom OM kit as a take along for my MF would probably have the 35-105 mm attached.

+1 regarding the 35-105/3.5-4.5

I have one, and have compared its performance with other lenses in my autocollimator. It's unusually sharp corner-to-corner, and will compete against primes wide open. Of course, wide open is f/3.5-4.5, which is much slower than f/1.8.

Mark Overton

 

[thuggins]

The f3.5-4.5 is a tiny lens, barely bigger than the 50mm prime. Folks criticize it for barrel distortion but for years it was my only lens and thousands of frames were shot thru it. I never had any problems with it. Then I got the f3.6 and bit the bullet on the size and weight because it was "better". One of these days I need to do a side by side comparison.

The 28-48mm is a sweet little lens that deserves to get more use. As for the 35-80mm, this is considered one of the best lenses ever made, by any company at any time. I've never seen one for sale and that's after 30+ years of collecting Oly's.