Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

zuiko 1,8/50
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Tue Nov 06, 2012 2:45 pm    Post subject: zuiko 1,8/50 Reply with quote
Hello.

Which is the OM zuiko 1,8/50 to look for?

The "JAPAN" version or the "MADE IN JAPAN" one?

Thanks in advance.


PostPosted: Tue Nov 06, 2012 3:10 pm    Post subject: Re: zuiko 1,8/50 Reply with quote
sonyrokkor wrote:
Hello.

Which is the OM zuiko 1,8/50 to look for?

The "JAPAN" version or the "MADE IN JAPAN" one?

Thanks in advance.



I'm sure there is a lot of parroting over this as some say "made in Japan" on the front and some say on the mount..well I have both versions and IMO the "made in Japan" on the front gives the same results as the one that hasn't. So I would like to see a comparison test as I can't see the difference in my two. Rolling Eyes


PostPosted: Tue Nov 06, 2012 3:14 pm    Post subject: Re: zuiko 1,8/50 Reply with quote
Excalibur wrote:
sonyrokkor wrote:
Hello.

Which is the OM zuiko 1,8/50 to look for?

The "JAPAN" version or the "MADE IN JAPAN" one?

Thanks in advance.



I'm sure there is a lot of parroting over this as some say "made in Japan" on the front and some say on the mount..well I have both versions and IMO the "made in Japan" on the front gives the same results as the one that hasn't. So I would like to see a comparison test as I can't see the difference in my two. Rolling Eyes


If I were you I would look for a site that has serial numbers for the various series of this lens. There were probably at least three variants of design and coatings, if my memory serves me.


PostPosted: Tue Nov 06, 2012 3:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic.php?t=49692

I wouldn't sweat the diffrences


PostPosted: Tue Nov 06, 2012 3:15 pm    Post subject: Re: zuiko 1,8/50 Reply with quote
Excalibur wrote:
sonyrokkor wrote:
Hello.

Which is the OM zuiko 1,8/50 to look for?

The "JAPAN" version or the "MADE IN JAPAN" one?

Thanks in advance.



I'm sure there is a lot of parroting over this as some say "made in Japan" on the front and some say on the mount..well I have both versions and IMO the "made in Japan" on the front gives the same results as the one that hasn't. So I would like to see a comparison test as I can't see the difference in my two. Rolling Eyes


If I were you I would look for a site that has serial numbers for the various series of this lens. There were probably at least three variants of design and coatings, if my memory serves me.


PostPosted: Tue Nov 06, 2012 3:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I know two differences on OM lenses, what is labeled with MC that is multi-coated others are single coated, I think Japan or Made in Japan irrelevant.


PostPosted: Tue Nov 06, 2012 4:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
in this case the bigger influence on picture quality will be the actual condition of lens rather than its version

however the MC version should start at sn ~1.9xx.xxx (circa) and the best are rumored to be sn 5.xxx.xxx , but I cannot tell for sure - I had few versions both SC and MC and all were same good


PostPosted: Tue Nov 06, 2012 4:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
berraneck wrote:
in this case the bigger influence on picture quality will be the actual condition of lens rather than its version

however the MC version should start at sn ~1.9xx.xxx (circa) and the best are rumored to be sn 5.xxx.xxx , but I cannot tell for sure - I had few versions both SC and MC and all were same good


These lenses are all fairly good, but obviously the later ones with multi-coatings are probably a little better.


PostPosted: Tue Nov 06, 2012 4:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Oreste wrote:
These lenses are all fairly good, but obviously the later ones with multi-coatings are probably a little better.
that is surely true, but as you say, the difference is quite minor


PostPosted: Tue Nov 06, 2012 5:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Oreste wrote:
berraneck wrote:
in this case the bigger influence on picture quality will be the actual condition of lens rather than its version

however the MC version should start at sn ~1.9xx.xxx (circa) and the best are rumored to be sn 5.xxx.xxx , but I cannot tell for sure - I had few versions both SC and MC and all were same good


These lenses are all fairly good, but obviously the later ones with multi-coatings are probably a little better.


Huh! "fairly good" ?


PostPosted: Tue Nov 06, 2012 5:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Excalibur wrote:
Oreste wrote:
berraneck wrote:
in this case the bigger influence on picture quality will be the actual condition of lens rather than its version

however the MC version should start at sn ~1.9xx.xxx (circa) and the best are rumored to be sn 5.xxx.xxx , but I cannot tell for sure - I had few versions both SC and MC and all were same good


These lenses are all fairly good, but obviously the later ones with multi-coatings are probably a little better.


Huh! "fairly good" ?


Normal moderately fast lenses from most Japanese makers are fairly good. Since these lenses are low-cost items, it is hard for any of them to be a state-of- the art design (in other words, they are not as good as theoretically possible, because such quality is cost-prohibitive). Very few normal lenses represent an all-out assault on the state of the art. It doesn't pay for makers to do that, as they can't sell them at a high-enough price to cover the investment.

The new 50mm APO-Summicrom ASPH from Leica, at $7000, is an example of that kind of approach. Few people will pay that much for a normal lens. I sure as hell would not!

If you are curious about this lens, here is a brief summary:

http://www.overgaard.dk/leica-50mm-APO-Summicron-M-ASPH-f-20.html


PostPosted: Tue Nov 06, 2012 9:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Not to get away from the question further with 7000 dollar lenses,

I don't think you should worry too much about the version either.
I haven't tested them against eachother, though.

There are versions of zuiko lenses that are MC even though it is not noted,
Any lens with F.Zuiko is likely SC,
Anything with Zuiko but without the F. in the name is almost certainly MC,
some of the newer ones were just not marked MC anymore (probably due to it becoming standard I guess).

See here:
http://olypedia.de/Zuiko_Auto-S_1:1%2C8/50_mm
(its in german, dont know about how well it translates using google)

You should probably be more worried about the glass being mark free, and try to score one with caps and hood (preferably the very nice metal one).
Also check for slow aperture blades, it is often the mechanism in the mount (not the blades themselves) having more viscosity due to some oil or just some gunk getting in it in these Zuikos.


PostPosted: Tue Nov 06, 2012 10:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ymmot wrote:
Not to get away from the question further with 7000 dollar lenses,

I don't think you should worry too much about the version either.
I haven't tested them against eachother, though.

There are versions of zuiko lenses that are MC even though it is not noted,
Any lens with F.Zuiko is likely SC,
Anything with Zuiko but without the F. in the name is almost certainly MC,
some of the newer ones were just not marked MC anymore (probably due to it becoming standard I guess).

See here:
http://olypedia.de/Zuiko_Auto-S_1:1%2C8/50_mm
(its in german, dont know about how well it translates using google)

You should probably be more worried about the glass being mark free, and try to score one with caps and hood (preferably the very nice metal one).
Also check for slow aperture blades, it is often the mechanism in the mount (not the blades themselves) having more viscosity due to some oil or just some gunk getting in it in these Zuikos.


Ich habe dieses gefunden:

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/olympusom1n2/shared/zuiko/htmls/50mm1a.htm

Most of the changes in such lenses were made to make the lenses cheaper to make as well as to improve their performance (but these improvements were only marginal).


PostPosted: Wed Nov 07, 2012 7:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have not directly compared the "Japan" to the "MIJ" versions, but I do know my MIJ version is very sharp and has great color, as does my 1.4, which I use most of the time.


PostPosted: Wed Nov 07, 2012 9:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
If they made a F1.4 version, why not just go for that one?


PostPosted: Wed Nov 07, 2012 10:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
The F1.4 is optically still very good, I have one as well and like it a lot.
However the F1.8 is slighly better as far as I know,
and the F1.4 is roughly three times more expensive in most cases.

So if you don't need the extra speed then there is no real reason to go for the F1.4.


PostPosted: Wed Nov 07, 2012 11:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks a lot, everybody.

Some information is here.

With this forum all is easy and fun.


PostPosted: Wed Nov 07, 2012 12:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have 4 of the 5 different versions. IIRC, the first two versions have a different optical formula to the last 3.

I might try a comparison test, and post it!!


PostPosted: Sun Nov 25, 2012 6:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The "Japan" version also has "MC" designation on the front. The "made in Japan" omits "MC", and is a newer model internally (in Olympus servide manuals you can download from the well-known Web site) referred to as "NMC", whatever it stands for. If I remember correctly, there was a silent upgrade during the NMC era (which can be seen if you look through the service manuals); in particular, the aperture has been redesigned, as MC and 1-st gen NMC fifties were prone to slow/sticky aperture syndrome. IQ wise, there should be not much difference between them.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1