tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1709537690528523236.post4469200190204540079..comments2024-03-15T06:59:20.114+10:00Comments on in my view ...: comparing legacy 35mm adapted fiftiesobakesanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13743339737847465926noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1709537690528523236.post-22636591086837158742009-09-14T03:36:22.187+10:002009-09-14T03:36:22.187+10:00Hi
as stated in the text the lenses were both 50 ...Hi<br /><br />as stated in the text the lenses were both 50 f1.8 lenses. The FD lens is a New FD 50 f1.8 with the A setting available on the aperture ring, the OM is the only OM 50 f1.8 which I know.<br /><br />I realize that the test is neither statistically significant in terms of samples or through in terms of resolution testing. It is what it is. Should it inspire anyone to do more meaningful testing or even compare their own pair of the same lenses I would be quite keen to see that and would be happy to add links to that.obakesanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13743339737847465926noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1709537690528523236.post-55605576037386988092009-09-13T21:11:40.289+10:002009-09-13T21:11:40.289+10:00Would be good to know what versions of each lenses...Would be good to know what versions of each lenses you tested. Also, with legacy lenses, it makes sense to check more than one copy. You never know who a particular lens was treated in the last, say, 20 years...<br /><br />Personally I am a Canon FD system user and collector. There are great lenses in the system and not so great ones. <br /><br />If you can, try one of the early SSC ASPHERICALs. Would love to see them perform on digital.Adminhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13150800101481829992noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1709537690528523236.post-50823526618469530082009-06-11T17:12:07.933+10:002009-06-11T17:12:07.933+10:00thank you for posting the results.
I have only t...thank you for posting the results. <br />I have only two Oly primes (50 1.8 and 35mm shift lens) the rest are Minolta MD and and Canon FD primes from 24 through to 200)<br /><br />I wanted to do similar test to yours all the time (just for fun, not that it will make any difference to my pictures as I hand hold and scan them). If you have other lenses please keep posting the results.<br /><br />I would very much like to know about Minolta lenses if you have any as well any zooms.<br /><br />thank you againAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1709537690528523236.post-38350950964252661212009-06-11T14:42:31.062+10:002009-06-11T14:42:31.062+10:00Hi
I agree that blanket statements are dangerous ...Hi<br /><br />I agree that blanket statements are dangerous generalisations, its like saying all Australians are anglo-saxon decedents. However as far as sampling goes my test is essentially random. I would be very happy to compare another FD 50 with mine to see how much variation exists within the batches. Please let me know if you would like to progress with that.<br /><br />email me at the reverse of:<br /><br />moc.liamtoh@elcillep<br /><br />:-)obakesanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13743339737847465926noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1709537690528523236.post-72478438398367983202009-06-11T14:26:40.580+10:002009-06-11T14:26:40.580+10:00Hhhmmmmm...nice work on your test but I don't ...Hhhmmmmm...nice work on your test but I don't think you can make a blanket statement about Zuiko lenses being superior to Canon FD, or anything else. I spent many hours studying "Chasseur d'Image" lens tests in the late 1990s, I came away with the impression that every manufacturer makes some good ones, and some bad ones. Even Leica had a couple that were rated poorly.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1709537690528523236.post-2873136502229532072009-06-10T03:53:18.421+10:002009-06-10T03:53:18.421+10:00Very neat job. I have always thought about the que...Very neat job. I have always thought about the question you have asked, Canon vs. Olympus. And somehow I have always been away from Canon since I have always felt some sort of bias...<br /><br />Although there is no Canon competitor in my test the link is <a href="http://www.flickr.com/groups/om_four_thirds_adapter/discuss/72157618358565989/" rel="nofollow">here</a> and <a href="http://snatre.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow">here</a>snatrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01052866751474152352noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1709537690528523236.post-61636802598574175002009-06-10T01:04:07.260+10:002009-06-10T01:04:07.260+10:00Interesting comparison. A lot of Zuiko lenses were...Interesting comparison. A lot of Zuiko lenses were (and remain) stellar performers. <br /><br />The 24/2.8 was recently rated against <i>modern</i> glass - and was second only to Canon's 1.4 - their current (very expensive) current top of the range lens. <br /><br />I think Olympus fell behind in the 20th century because the OM system was never developed. Canon's AE series were brilliant and made OMs look very old fashioned. That, and Canikon have built up solid importer and dealer networks. Interesting question though.Administratorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10096597152710828423noreply@blogger.com