p.9 #2 · Who's Got Olympus on Sony A7/A7R Images ???
Beni wrote:
I got an MC in the end. Brand new lens in box, very late serial number, 1 year warranty. Cost a packet but I don't think these lenses will be dropping in price any time soon.
Finding a hood is another problem. Do they make the cheap rubber hoods for lenses this wide?
Congrats on finding the new one. I've got a pretty good "cheap rubber hood" (came with lens from FM'er I purchased from), so I know they are out there, but I don't have a source.
p.9 #3 · Who's Got Olympus on Sony A7/A7R Images ???
Beni wrote:
I got an MC in the end. Brand new lens in box, very late serial number, 1 year warranty. Cost a packet but I don't think these lenses will be dropping in price any time soon.
Finding a hood is another problem. Do they make the cheap rubber hoods for lenses this wide?
They came with the hoods when new - didn't yours include one?
p.9 #4 · Who's Got Olympus on Sony A7/A7R Images ???
When you say lens box do you mean the leatherette case? I don't know about the 21/3.5 but I had a 28/2 and the hood was held in the lid of the case. The seller didn't even know it was there.
p.9 #6 · Who's Got Olympus on Sony A7/A7R Images ???
My case for the 24/2.8 also has a hood hiding in the lid. While my copy of the 21/3.5 has a leatherette case, it is too small for a hood and there is none.
mcbroomf wrote:
When you say lens box do you mean the leatherette case? I don't know about the 21/3.5 but I had a 28/2 and the hood was held in the lid of the case. The seller didn't even know it was there.
p.9 #8 · Who's Got Olympus on Sony A7/A7R Images ???
Due a deep winter freeze I'm having a bugger of a time getting out with my gear, but so far the testing I've done with my new OM 21 1:2 is pretty darn impressive. It may even be sharper than my 28mm 1:2.
I think I'm falling in love with OM f/2 lenses which isn't that great for my bank account...
p.9 #10 · Who's Got Olympus on Sony A7/A7R Images ???
Vern Dewit wrote:
Due a deep winter freeze I'm having a bugger of a time getting out with my gear, but so far the testing I've done with my new OM 21 1:2 is pretty darn impressive. It may even be sharper than my 28mm 1:2.
I think I'm falling in love with OM f/2 lenses which isn't that great for my bank account...
It warmed up a bit here today, so I could get out!
p.9 #11 · Who's Got Olympus on Sony A7/A7R Images ???
tennclay wrote:
It warmed up a bit here today, so I could get out!
Zuiko 18mm on the A7r:
Thanks for the pic - looks pretty smeared / soft in the upper right corner? Is that representative of the 18mm on the FF Sony? I may just stop pursuing it in that case since the 21mm is so much better in the corners...
p.9 #12 · Who's Got Olympus on Sony A7/A7R Images ???
Vern Dewit wrote:
Thanks for the pic - looks pretty smeared / soft in the upper right corner? Is that representative of the 18mm on the FF Sony? I may just stop pursuing it in that case since the 21mm is so much better in the corners...
Yes it seems it is worse in that corner, but I will need to test it at some point, before I can be sure. I have some shots that seem to have less smearing but lots of CA. Also, other published tests have shown bad corners when used on a FF digital, like a Canon -so I am not sure it just isn't the nature of the lens or adapter rather than the camera. Of course it doesn't really matter if the results are up to snuff; the 21 may be the way to go.
p.9 #13 · Who's Got Olympus on Sony A7/A7R Images ???
I think that you have to pay attention to what distance you are using your Oly 18 relative to the corners. If you are asking for the dof to cover near range focus deep into the corners, that's a tough gig on the trig / distances involved. I'd want to see more normal distances and in very different lighting contrast levels before I'd pass on the 18. I've not seen any problems with my Oly 18 other than the vignetting.
p.9 #14 · Who's Got Olympus on Sony A7/A7R Images ???
RustyBug wrote:
I think that you have to pay attention to what distance you are using your Oly 18 relative to the corners. If you are asking for the dof to cover near range focus deep into the corners, that's a tough gig on the trig / distances involved. I'd want to see more normal distances and in very different lighting contrast levels before I'd pass on the 18. I've not seen any problems with my Oly 18 other than the vignetting.
I haven't written it off, but I have seen tests showing not so great edges and corners on FF (e.g., the ancient 16:9 site has a test against the Elmarit_R 19mm.) I used it years ago and saw some mushy edges too (different copy). I have to use it more....
p.9 #15 · Who's Got Olympus on Sony A7/A7R Images ???
Gotcha @ Elmarit R 19mm ... but, that's a mighty tall bar with a mighty tall price tag. I don't shoot my Oly 18 much since I got my 24L TS-E II. I may have to check through some files on a diff hard drive to see if I can find anything useful from my copy.
I have more scans to post up there sometime soon but there's a decent amount to start with.
the 21/3.5 is a nice lens, the MC version is relatively rare. The hoods for the 21s are quite rare. The 21/3.5 shares a hood with the 35/shift so keep an eye out for one of those.
the 85/2 and 100/2.8 are nice, compact, and not too expensive, but are significantly eclipsed by the 90/2 and 100/2. If you could have only one, the 90/2 is it, IMNSHO.
The 28/3.5 is better than the 28/2.8, for some reason. 28/2 better than both of course. The 24/2.8 is a world beater for it's size and price.
the 18/3.5 is quite good in the corners, at least as good as the 21s I think, based on my examples. The 18/3.5 is also amazingly small and light and has a unique optical formula, which is shared with the jewel-like OM 24/shift, itself a fantastic lens. Also probably the lowest distortion of any 17-18mm lens of that era (or even today).
I've had all these lenses mentioned, and more, sold off some as I am not shooting 35mm much anymore (mostly medium/large format). But the OM lineup is among the best ever, in many ways.
p.9 #18 · Who's Got Olympus on Sony A7/A7R Images ???
Nice summary Ed, thanks. I can echo the 18/3.5 @ excellent distortion, the 21/3.5 MC is nice, the 28/3.5 is a steal of a gem for its size/price and the 24/2.8 is quite good too. It wasn't till I picked up my 24L TS-E II that I put down my 24/2.8 ... but that is a huge difference is price/size/weight.
p.9 #19 · Who's Got Olympus on Sony A7/A7R Images ???
I think Ed has it.
I'd add a note about the ~50s tho; and say that the 50/2 is a lens worth owning even if it's your only Zuiko. The 50/1.2 and 55/1.2 aren't bad either, and the 50/3.5 is one of my all time favorite lenses for any system but it's a bit limited unless you already have an adapter in which case what are you doing go buy one now.
p.9 #20 · Who's Got Olympus on Sony A7/A7R Images ???
Rusty: no doubt the 24/TS-E mk2 has likely caught up and eclipsed the zuikos, but at 10x the price and size difference, I would hope so. ;-) The 24/2.8 OM is really amazing considering size and cost. They did that one right. It shares an optical formula with the 35/shift, btw.
Re: OM 50s. The 50/2 is the only one of those I never had. I passed on one at $350 I should have bought, in retrospect. 50/1.2 is sublime, and the 55/1.2 has some of the most amazing bokeh and glow I have ever seen. It's an acquired taste but there's not much else like it out there. the 50/3.5 is a great lens too, and amazingly cheap vs. many of the other zuikos. They seem to go begging at < $125-ish. Back in the day, there was only about $50 price difference between 50/3.5 and 50/2 macro, the 50/3.5 was pretty expensive. Almost as much as the 50/1.2, price-wise, at the time.
The 40/2 is worth mentioning, it's a neat lens, tiny, and a unique all air-spaced 6 element design. I had one for a while and enjoyed it, but sold it as the collector value was too high to warrant just hanging onto it if I wasn't using it much. Worth getting if you can find one for a reasonable (< $350 IMHO) price.
And if you are into Macro, the OM lineup has a lot to offer; That and wide-angles were really where they shined the best I think.
