metagraphica wrote:
cavewalker - Wow that is beautiful. It looks like a painting.
Have you ever compared your "King Zuiko" to an OM ELICAR DINE KIRON 90mm F2.5 MACRO?
thx metagraphica. I don' know the Kiron 2.5/90 but i've compared the King-Zuiko with the Vivitar 2.5/90 (Bokina) and the Zuiko was the better. More contrast and sharper and better bokeh. Zuiko 2/90 images at f2 always looks like as they have a glow inside.
cavewalker - thanks for the reply about the 90 macros. I wish the OM 90 wasn't so expensive.
surfotog - I'd be interesting in pics from the 250 f/2 as well.
rtester - I just picked up a very nice 40 f/2. It is amazingly sharp in the test pics I've taken...now to go out and use it on something interesting. Love your last shot of the waitress.
Here's some pics with my 21 f/3.5 from last weekend. Including a table (couldn't find any benches) for Paul.
surfotog wrote:
Anyone have some shots from the 250/2? That lens has always intrigued me.
I use the 250/2 a lot, but I am exclusively an analogue B&W photographer (my images won't appears as polished or colourful as the nice digital colour shots in this thread). Here are some recent darkroom prints (scanned on an Epson V700). All are shot at f/2.0 (this lens shouldn't even *have* an aperture mechanism, who'd be crazy enough to stop it down and lose the 'look'?)
Sorry for the varying sizes, these were scanned and prepared at different times. All were shot on Ilford FP4 or Ilford Pan F, with an Olympus OM-1 and OM-3Ti.
The Zuiko 250/2 is - by far - the Zuiko with the highest performance (according to tests). It's an absolute landmark lens. Basically the same size as a Canon EF 300 f/2.8L, but a whole stop faster (front element with twice the area), and optically every bit as good. It out-resolves any film I've thrown at it across the frame at any aperture, limited only by my photographic abilities. Most of the above images were also taken hand-held, not a great idea with a 4kg lens.
metagraphica wrote:
cavewalker - Wow that is beautiful. It looks like a painting.
Have you ever compared your "King Zuiko" to an OM ELICAR DINE KIRON 90mm F2.5 MACRO?
Funny you should ask. I've had three copies of the Lester Dine (one was labled Vivitar, the other was an original Kiron) , two copies of the Elicar, and three copies of the Zuiko 90/2. All are gone now except for a Zuiko 90/2.
The Kiron (Lester Dine, Vivitar,...) are excellent, as is the Elicar. The both go to 1:1 macro. The Kiron has better MC coatings on the lens elements which helps in bright light. The Elicar has a nice look to it, and has smoother bokeh.
The Zuiko is the sharpest, has a great look, the best colors, the best bokeh, and it is a full stop faster. I use a front diopter if I want 1:1 macro. For me, it is truly a "king Zuiko", and even a "King Macro" . The only macro that comes close is the new Zeiss 100/2, but I don't like its heavy LoCA wide open, or its pronounced look.
dawid - Wonderful pics. Your 3rd picture, of the toes, is exquisite. Tone, composition, and intriguing subject! Looks like the OM 250 is every bit as nice as I would have guessed.
pdmphoto - Thanks very much for your insight on the Lester Dines. Much appreciated. Now, as always, it just comes down to the age old question is the Zuiko that much better to be priced 3x as much?
Here's a couple with the Zuiko 250 f2 from a friend in South Africa, Dawid. He just posted these on the OM list site.
He obtained one form John Hermanson a year ago or so. I was thinking of getting it,
but he decided before I did. It found a better home anyway and the CFO would not have been pleased. Rarely see one available.
Oops, I see Dawid posted them--- too late as I hadn't refeshed the link in quite awhile as I am at work. . Sorry.-- But they are worth several looks.
Mike
Michael Gordon wrote:
Oops, I see Dawid posted them--- too late as I hadn't refeshed the link in quite awhile as I am at work. . Sorry.-- But they are worth several looks.
Mike
Haha, thanks Michael. Just co-incidence, I guess, that I happened upon this FM thread also :-)
