p.82 #4 · What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
Jman13 wrote:
Aww...come on Bif...you should recognize it! It is indeed the new Olympus 75mm f/1.8. It's smaller and lighter than it looks in pictures.
Wait, you think I would be able to recognize a modern AF lens?
Anyway, it actually looks kinda cool! Is that a plastic or metal body BTW?
p.82 #5 · What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
All metal body, including the focus ring. All markings are engraved on the barrel. The inner black retaining ring is plastic, but that's pretty much the case on any lens.
p.82 #7 · What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
There's no dedicated manual focus mode. Focus is by wire like all native electronic m4/3 lenses (the voigtlanders are 'native' but have no electronics). Even the 12/2 in 'manual focus mode' is still by wire, though it feels like it's not. Damping on the focus ring is nice and smooth...good feel, like most higher end m4/3 lenses.
p.82 #9 · What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
Cool, thanks!
Yeah, ID rings are metal on like 80% of my MF lenses. On newer AF lenses it's like just the opposite (20% are metal and 80% are plastic) - or something like that. I like metal better of course! Sounds like a really nice lens! What's the MSRP in US $ ?
FlyPenFly,
Careful there... That's DPR, about 10% of their "bench tests" are flawed, wrong, bad, BS, crap, incorrect, etc. If you ever see something kinda surprising from DPR chances are they f'd up yet again.
I can say the same for their Specification lists too but I think that's closer to a 5% error rate. They make a lot of mistakes and don't usually correct them even when notified. <shrug>
p.82 #10 · What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
Bifurcator wrote:
Cool, thanks!
FlyPenFly,
Careful there... That's DPR, about 10% of their "bench tests" are flawed, wrong, bad, BS, crap, incorrect, etc. If you ever see something kinda surprising from DPR chances are they f'd up yet again.
I can say the same for their Specification lists too but I think that's closer to a 5% error rate. They make a lot of mistakes and don't usually correct them even when notified. <shrug>
nah, whether they did that test right or not, that's how the ZD 50 performs.
p.82 #11 · What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
Right, but it's the Leica 45 that's suspicious there... not the ZD 50...
I've hardly ever seen them make an error where something looked better than it actually was (except for their image samples). It's usually the opposite. Like that Leica chart there or I can count about 10 different cameras just from memory where they said it doesn't have a feature which it actually does have, or they listed it slower than every other tester at some function, etc.
In this case they probably tested that leica lens with a massive finger smudge on the rear element. That's just the kinda shite I'd expect from them too.
I could be wrong of course but I was just advising that he double check if in doubt.
p.82 #12 · What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
Bifurcator wrote:
Right, but it's the Leica 45 that's suspicious there... not the ZD 50...
I've hardly ever seen them make an error where something looked better than it actually was (except for their image samples). It's usually the opposite. Like that Leica chart there or I can count about 10 different cameras just from memory where they said it doesn't have a feature which it actually does have, or they listed it slower than every other tester at some function, etc.
In this case they probably tested that leica lens with a massive finger smudge on the rear element. That's just the kinda shite I'd expect from them too.
I could be wrong of course but I was just advising that he double check if in doubt.
p.82 #14 · What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
When I go through the other lenses I've owned and used, dpreview lens results seem to match up. I am confused about the PL45 results since lenstip got astronomical scores. But the pattern of weak corners does repeat so it seems believable.
It's too bad lenstip used the heavy AA filter e-510 to test the zd50. Another data point would have been fun
p.82 #15 · What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
carstenw wrote:
Bif, what would a Contax 100/2.8 Makro cost in Japan?
I'll sell you mine for $650 if you want it. But typically they go for between ¥55,000 on the cheap and ¥70,000 on the average here in Japan with a few idiots charging stupid prices (same like in the USA and elsewhere I guess)
¥55,000 right now is: $730 via PayPal or most bank exchanges.
¥70,000 right now is: $925 via PayPal or most bank exchanges.
p.82 #16 · What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
Hmm, I'll have to sell something else first then. I was hoping they would be a bit cheaper, to make it worth the shipment and taxes to bring it into Europe. You are not passing by the EU any time soon, by any chance?
p.82 #18 · What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
That's about 530 Euro, plus 26.7% VAT and customs fees. I need to save a little. Do you figure you'll keep it for a bit? Have you tried it on the Contax bellows?
At this point selling off my Contax 645 system probably makes sense. I don't use it so much, but have resisted selling it due to the quality of the lenses. However, the 35/3.5 is equivalent to the ZF21 and the 120/4 is similar to the 100/2.8, so I figure I have more or less replaced it at that point.
It is indeed the new Olympus 75mm f/1.8. It's smaller and lighter than it looks in pictures. 
Sounds like a really nice lens! What's the MSRP in US $ ?