Zuiko 50 f1.4 or Zuiko 50 f1.4?

[mopar_guy]

Zuiko 50/1.8, six elements in four groups; Zuiko 50/1.4 seven elements in six groups. So, from the standpoint of contrast and flare control the 1.8 will perform better than the 1.4 because it has fewer internal surfaces and smaller diameter elements - 1.8 has six internal surfaces, the 1.4 has ten.
All other things being equal, the slower lens will have greater apparent sharpness-"crispness" if you will.

Yes, that's the theory. In my experience, the differences do exist, but are slight. Also, a lens such as the 50mm f2 Zuiko Macro should be complete crap with it's nine elements, but it is a very good lens.:munch:

 

[wblynch]

Would you care to buy an aperture-free one? ))))
I have a friend who likes disassembling lenses in his free time. The ones he manages to assemble can be sold relly cheap. )).

Actually I do need one like that. I have a 1.4 that came to me with a small chip on the edge of the front element. A broken lens like that would be a perfect donor .

Provided it was priced appropriately, of course.

 

[sangetsu]

I have used a few variations of each type of lens, I have two of them on my desk now. My favorites are the 50/1.8, and the 50/1.2. The 50/1.8 is my favorite "all-around" lens, I use the 55/1.2 for shooting wide open at near subjects. The 55/1.2 gives dreamy results when shooting flowers, plants, or insects.

 

[peters8]

Thank you very much...
I don't speak and I don't understand at 100% english leanguage so please be patient with me
although I know it is not easy with my "stupid" questions...
I explaine a little:i haven't a lot of money...i can't buy both lens,unfortunarely.I must buy only zuiko 50 mm.
I need a excelent 50 mm,it isn't important at all the l the brightness of the glass. I don't use 1.4 or 1.8 diaphragms never so the brightness isn't an important feature at all.
I'm searching for a Zuiko 50 lens with sharpness,acutance,ecc...ecc...not with hight brightness level!
It seems that the 1.8 is better at this respect.
Is it correct?...
The 50 1.4 Zuiko that I could buy is the "OM-SYSTEM G.ZUIKO AUTO-S 1.4",while in this moment i don't remember at all which was the correct 1.8 model that I could buy...
So tecnically any 50 1.8 Zuiko lens,if I understanding correctly,is better (a part the brightness that it's not an important feature for me) than the G.Zuiko AUTO-S 1.4 50mm lens.
Is it correct?...in this case I prefer to buy the 1.8 50 mm Zuiko.
So do you think that this is the right choice for me?
I repeat, I'm sorry if I'm burdening us,but I haven't money at the moment and I've to do the right choice.In this case I haven't the possibility to experiment,to make comparisons...I must buy the right 50 mm Zuiko lens.
Please,for the last time,give me an opinion,Itrust you.
thanks for you patience.
Regards

 

[wblynch]

Buy the one with the cleanest glass. That makes more difference than anything else.

I have 8 of the 1.8 and 3 of the 1.4

Cleanliness is Godliness.

 

[peters8]

Bill,sorry but this answer doesn't help much me!...I buy any lens only if it's in good conditions.
I need the best 50 mm,I repeat (i'm sorry...I'm tired too!!!...I'm sorry...I'msorry my friends!) I don't need brightness...I need sharpness,contrast...acutance anything else!!!..This is not a subjective detail, it is an objective detail... It is mathematics:the technical features of any lens are objective,they does not depend on personal taste ...they are equal for all, are universal. It's a picture you get with that lens that is subjectively good or bad ... not the lens in itself...The sharpness,the contrast,the distortion of lens are technical datas that are measured in laboratory scientifically ... not through personal tastes.At least it's my opinion...I hope that you can understand me.I know that write and speak english very bad.i'm very sorry for this.



It would be sufficient only a rapid answer...anything else!...Zuiko 1.4 or Zuiko 1.8...this is the dilemma!
Please don't hate me friends!
Regards!

 

[wblynch]

There is no BEST.

My answers are based on owing and using these for 38 years.

Sorry I have.no more to offer.

 

[MattKing]

Bill,sorry but this answer doesn't help much me!...I buy any lens only if it's in good conditions.
I need the best 50 mm,I repeat (i'm sorry...I'm tired too!!!...I'm sorry...I'msorry my friends!) I don't need brightness...I need sharpness,contrast...acutance anything else!!!..This is not a subjective detail, it is an objective detail... It is mathematics:the technical features of any lens are objective,they does not depend on personal taste ...they are equal for all, are universal. It's a picture you get with that lens that is subjectively good or bad ... not the lens in itself...The sharpness,the contrast,the distortion of lens are technical datas that are measured in laboratory scientifically ... not through personal tastes.At least it's my opinion...I hope that you can understand me.I know that write and speak english very bad.i'm very sorry for this.



It would be sufficient only a rapid answer...anything else!...Zuiko 1.4 or Zuiko 1.8...this is the dilemma!
Please don't hate me friends!
Regards!

I know that we are frustrating you, but there really isn't a clear answer to your question.

If you exclude the small difference in maximum aperture, and are comparing performance stopped down a stop or two, the Zuiko 50mm 1.4 and 1.8 lenses perform very similarly - any difference in performance is more likely due to sample variation then it is due to design differences.

If you do measure those things that can be measured on an optical bench, you will probably find that one will be slightly better at one f/stop, while the other will be slightly better art another.

The later versions have better coatings.

The f/1.4 version gives you a brighter viewfinder. The f/1.8 version is very compact.

 

[peters8]

Ok i'm grateful for your patience and for the big support you have given to me!thanks you to everyone! i've decided.i'll buy the 1.4
only the last question:is the G.Zuiko the single coated version?
regards

 

[mopar_guy]

Ok i'm grateful for your patience and for the big support you have given to me!thanks you to everyone! i've decided.i'll buy the 1.4
only the last question:is the G.Zuiko the single coated version?
regards

Yes.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

Yes, that's the theory. In my experience, the differences do exist, but are slight. Also, a lens such as the 50mm f2 Zuiko Macro should be complete crap with it's nine elements, but it is a very good lens.:munch:

My Nikkor UD 20/3.5 should be even crappier, with it's 11 single coated elements (I forget the number of air-to-glass surfaces) but it's also an excellent lens. It's the number of internal sufaces, not the number of elements, anyway.

 

[Ken N]

With both the 1.8 and 1.4 lenses, the earlier versions tended to be sharper in the center. Later versions not quite as sharp in the center, but the corners are sharper. Later versions of both lenses also are contrastier, less flare prone and SLIGHTLY more flat-fielded.

If stopped down in the F5.6 to F8 realm, the 1.8 and 1.4 render nearly identical images. My controlled testing reveals no advantage one to the other.

I personally reach for the 1.4 because of how the bokeh renders. It's just a little more artsy. Mine are all of the last version made.

 

[dynachrome]

I don't think the 50/2 replaced the 50/3.5. The f/2 lens was much more espensive. I have the f/3.5 and it is sharp at every distance and f/stop. If a normal lens will be used closed down and you are yearning for sharpness, get a medium format camera. If I use a Bronica GS-1 with the normal 100/3.5 lens I will expect to get a sharper 8X10, 11X14, 16X20 etc. than any standard lens with a 35mm camera can produce.

 

[John Hermanson]

There are 5 different 50mm 1.8. Te best one was the last one made: it says "made in Japan" on the name ring. It is multicoated and very sharp. There were 5 different 50mm 1.4 made. The last version is preferred by most. It is multicoated and (I think) has serial numbers above 1,110,000. John

 

[peters8]

There are 5 different 50mm 1.8. Te best one was the last one made: it says "made in Japan" on the name ring. It is multicoated and very sharp. There were 5 different 50mm 1.4 made. The last version is preferred by most. It is multicoated and (I think) has serial numbers above 1,110,000. John

John how do I recognize the 1.4 multicoated version?...
Is there a particular identification?...In my Zuiko if I remember well (now it is not with me) there's this identification:
"G.zuiko om-system Auto-s"...could this identification be right?...I'm sure that it was a G.Zuiko...Do you know something about this version/this serie?
Thanks

 

[E. von Hoegh]

John how do I recognize the 1.4 multicoated version?...
Is there a particular identification?...In my Zuiko if I remember well (now it is not with me) there's this identification:
"G.zuiko om-system Auto-s"...could this identification be right?...I'm sure that it was a G.Zuiko...Do you know something about this version/this serie?
Thanks

It will be marked "MC". At least mine is, as well as several other multicoated Zuikos I have.

 

[Ulrich Drolshagen]

It will be marked "MC". At least mine is, as well as several other multicoated Zuikos I have.

AFAIK only during the phase of transition from singlecoated to multicoated when there were sold both types at the same time, the multicoated lenses were denoted by MC. Later, when all new lenses were multicoated Olympus dropped the term.

 

[mopar_guy]

John how do I recognize the 1.4 multicoated version?...
Is there a particular identification?...In my Zuiko if I remember well (now it is not with me) there's this identification:
"G.zuiko om-system Auto-s"...could this identification be right?...I'm sure that it was a G.Zuiko...Do you know something about this version/this serie?
Thanks

In general terms, single coated lenses are labeled with a letter of the alphabet and the name Zuiko. The letter used indicates how many elements are used: A=1, B=2, C=3, etc. Your G.Zuiko is a single coated lens. Some early production lenses were labeled with the letters MC to indicate multi-coating. Late production lenses are not specifically labeled as MC, but multi-coating was used on all lenses starting around the early 1980's. There were definitely differences in the way that lenses were labeled over the production run.

A couple of examples:

50mm f1.4 Zuiko AUTO-S
Introduced as part of the original "M" system. Early examples are labeled as G.Zuiko and have silver colored accents around the filter mounting threads as well as the aperture ring: OLYMPUS OM-SYSTEM G.ZUIKO AUTO-S 1:1.4 f=50mm 470854. There was also a version of the G.Zuiko without the silver markings. When Olympus started to multi-coat all lenses, the 'G' was dropped and the lenses were labeled "MC". The last version was simply labeled as follows: OLYMPUS OM-SYSTEM ZUIKO AUTO-S 50mm 1:1.4 1123989 Japan. I used my serial number as an example and this is definitely a multi-coated lens.

35mm f2.0 Zuiko AUTO-W
I have one with a low serial number that is a "Silver-nose". The complete labeling on the filter ring is: OLYMPUS OM-SYSTEM ZUIKO MC AUTO-W 1:2 f=35mm 106322 Japan.
I have a version that was made a little later and does not have the silver accents that is labeled: OLYMPUS OM-SYSTEM ZUIKO MC AUTO-W 1:2 f=35mm 129334 Japan.
The final version from after 1981 is labeled as follows: OLYMPUS OM-SYSTEM ZUIKO AUTO-W 35mm 1:2 1508xx made in Japan.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

AFAIK only during the phase of transition from singlecoated to multicoated when there were sold both types at the same time, the multicoated lenses were denoted by MC. Later, when all new lenses were multicoated Olympus dropped the term.

That makes sense, the lenses I have were all purchased in the years 1985-1988.

 

[peters8]

Thanks!

Does it change too much that they're simply just single-coated lenses or however this feature is not so negative after all?
Thanks
Ciao

 

[Ulrich Drolshagen]

Thanks!

Does it change too much that they're simply just single-coated lenses or however this feature is not so negative after all?
Thanks
Ciao

The use of a lens shade is more important to the reduction of flare than the number of coatings IMHO.

Ulrich

 

[mopar_guy]

The use of a lens shade is more important to the reduction of flare than the number of coatings IMHO.

Ulrich

I agree.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

The use of a lens shade is more important to the reduction of flare than the number of coatings IMHO.

Ulrich

That's been my experience, too.

 

[John Hermanson]

The 2 versions of the 50 1.4 that are MC have elements with green/purple reflections. Type 5 has these reflections but does NOT have MC on the name ring. Type 4 (below serial number 1,110,000) has same reflections and DOES have MC on the name ring. Type 3-2-1 are single coated and have G Zuiko (meaning 7 elements, G being the 7th letter of the alphabet) on the name ring. SC coating may have a yellowish look. Last multicoated version with a shade will outperform any SC with a lens shade. John