Which are your favourite OM Zuiko lenses and why?

..just wondered...

i only have two, 50mm 1.4 and a 100mm 2.8. i love the latter. if you include all lenses in om mount, i love my 28,, sigma 2.8 as well.

Sharp, fast.

I only own 50/1.4 and 50/1.8 (many) zuiko lenses. I really love my 50/1.4 single coated lens. I am looking at acquiring an 85/2 and a 300/4.5 over the course of the next year.

 

For non zuiko lenses, but OM mount, I really love my Sigma 28/1.8 lens, its slick. In some ways I love how compact and lovely feeling my Tamron 28/2.5 almost more (certainly use it more because of its small size).

135 2.8. I can't shoot with it enough.

100mm f/2.8. Beautiful results and VERY compact compared to other 100mm lenses, great background separation for portraits, sharp but not TOO sharp, with a nice soft bokeh, just a great portrait lens all around.

 

35-70 f/3.5-4.5. Tiny. One of the smallest zoom lenses I have ever seen in any focal length, and sharp as a tack. This lens proves for me that number of elements and size of the lens has absolutely NOTHING to do with final results. It preforms great at all zooms and is an excellent choice when you can only carry one lens. Close focus allows for Portraits and Landscapes with one optic. Bokeh is a little harsh, but gives a nice abstraction with vegetation that is pleasant to look at. Size and weight of the lens makes up for it's slowness, it's easy to shoot hand-held even in low light with slow film.

 

24mm f/2.8. The perfect wide. It's compact, sharp and I think 24mm is the perfect balance in a wide angle. It gives you breathtaking landscapes without distortion, but can also serve the purpose of giving you dramatic foreshortening distortion if you close focus. Stopped down, you can shoot it for street photography with the focus set to infinity and never touch the focus. For me, it's "just wide enough" and is a nice compact gem that I can carry in my pocket with caps on it. About the same size as the 50mm f/1.8 and packs a mean punch.

 

50mm f/1.8. I'm not a fan of the f/1.4. It's too big, too heavy and too soft wide-open for my taste. The 1.8 is great and can be used for just about anything you challenge it with. I've never noticed too much of a difference in brightness between the 1.8 and 1.4, but the 1.8 is MILES easier to nail critical focus. I can focus with this lens as fast than most AF lenses can do their thing... and the results are wicked sharp and the bokeh is smooth with a touch of abstraction. Again, compact and fun.

 

These 4 lenses make up my main shooting line and I can pack them into a TINY camera bag knowing that I have my bases covered. I've never really shot any lenses longer than 135mm on a regular basis, probably because I don't photograph birds. I shoot people, buildings and landscapes and I think this set is perfect for what I do.

Another vote for the 100mm f2.8 - it just seemed like I saw the world through 100mm eyes. Olympus had a real winner in this lens.

 

jZ

Like a broken record....100 2.8. Sweet little lens. Attached to an OM-1MD with the nice big viewfinder, yup, that's it.

40/2, 28/3.5. The first one's expensive, the other dirt cheap. Both sharp and have character.

 

Just picked up the 35-70/3.5-4.5, which I had never ever seen before. It is barely bigger than a Zuiko prime. I may really end up liking it.

My favorites, 100mm/f2, 18mm, 21mm/f2, 28mm/f2 and 500mm.

Tough question as their are too many good ones!

 

21/2.0, 16/3.5, 50/1.4, 28/2.8, 135/2.8 are those most often used by me.

For me it's the 24mm f2.8 wide angle. It's so tiny but a sharp little beast. I like it even better than Nikon's 24mm AIS lens.

Runner up would be my single coated 50mm 1.4. It's the closest thing to a Japanese Zeiss Tessar.

24mm f2.8. My "standard" lens. Compact, sharp, and it sees scenery the way I do.

 

100mm f2.8 great portrait lens. The photojournalist's favorite.

 

With those two, EVERY image is within your grasp.

50/1.8 nice and light great sharpness, cheap

 

50/1.4 great lens, I love the bokeh, I reckon the 1.8 is a bit sharper though so when fast speed doesn't matter i usually stick to the 1.8

 

100 f/2.8 +1 for this great lens. IMO best value for money non-50mm lens the OM system has to offer. Great for portraits and general photography. 50mm gets boring after a while because everyone uses it as the stock standard focal length

Andy K.,

 

You WILL end up liking it. It feels sorta plasticy and cheap because it's so light, but the first time you carry

it mounted on a camera around your neck all day you will appreciate it... and when you get the photos back you'll

just fall in love. No doubts in my mind. I bought mine just based on the specifications but after I saw the

results I knew it was something else.

My favorite Zuiko lenses are: 24mm F2.8, 28mm F2.8, 50mm F2.0, 100mm F2.0. I have other Zuiko lenses, but I keep on going back and using these lenses and I am always satisfied.

My favorite all around lens is the 35mm/2.8. I take mostly scenic shots and this

lens gives me a nice moderate wide angle. Its good for group shots too.

 

I have the 28mm/3.5 35mm/2.8 135mm/2.8 all three I bought with my OM-2

in 1979 (didn't buy a normal lens at that time)

 

Also have 50mm/1.8 50mm/1.4 75-150 zoom I bought recently from eBay.

85mm f/2 is the only reason I still can't give up film completely.

My aged, beaten up SC 35mm f2.8. Its AoV is just right for my way of seeing or my kinds of subjects. Prints and

scans seems sharp enough, and I like its rendering. This last point is highly subjective as I've never done side-by-

side comparisons, but I so often pick out the shots with this lens as having the look I like best.

 

The 50/1.8 (MIJ version) has served me well, and I know why people like the 100/2.8 (why oh why did I sell that lens?

I prefer it over the late 85/2 that replaced it). But the old, worn 35mm is my 'comfort blanket' lens.

50 f1.4 (also 50 f1.8), 35 f2.8, 135 f2.8. Most of my photography are with the 50 and 35 mm lenses. Sharp and their focal lengths fit better my way of seeing. The 135 gets a good amount of use when I need a longer lens.

 

I am beginning to play with my more recently acquired 40 f2 and 100 f2.8. A 28 f2.8 gets occasional use. I rarely go any wider. A vivitar 19 mm f3.8 is very rarely used.

 

Sincerely,

 

Hany.

Apart from the 50mm f1.8 which I don't use, I have only four, which cover functions my Tamron Adaptall-2 SP lenses do not:

 

35mm f3.5 shift for architecture; 50mm f3.5 macro, for its combined high quality and lightness; 20mm f2 and 38mm f2.8 auto macro bellows lenses for their quality, range of magnification and auto diaphragm function.

50/1.4 MC. 'cos it's sharp at all apertures with beautiful bokeh. 8 diaphragm blades. And the feel is priceless.

The cheaper 50/1.8 (which I also own) just lacks the feel of the more expensive faster sibling.

 

BTW: the MC variants of 50/1.8 are made of plastic! Yuck!

24 F2.8 High resolution and high contrast. A very! very! sharp lens. Better in my opinion than my older 24mm F2 that I used to use until it developed fungus and could not be cleaned but olympus. I bought a brand new 24mm F2.8 to replace it a few years back and have never regreted buying this one over the 24mm F2. The most usable wide angle for Landscape.

 

90mm F2 possibly my sharpest zuiko (thought my 100mm F2.8 is quite good) awesome bokeh due to 9 blade aperture. I love using this lens for close ups at wider apertures, and landscape shots.

 

80mm F4 My favourite lens for macro insect shots. Insanely sharp at wider apertures. Does not like to be stopped down too much though (I try not to use mine below F11). I like to use it with the 65-165 auto tube and diffused flash to freeze subject movement.

 

85-250mm F5 I like using this lens on a tripod for landscape work from the side of the road. Possibly one of the most underated Zuikos. You never seem to hear a lot about this lens. I have found my one to be sharp throughout the zoom range and very stable when attached to a tripod via its tripod collar. I cannot see any difference in sharpness between this lens and a prime tele zuikos such as 200m F4. Excellent build quality. This was an expensive lens in its day. And still stands up well against modern competition.

I've gotten good pix out of all my Zuis.

 

The humble 50 1.8 is probably the one that I couldn't live without, because of it's smallness. There's also something special about it. The 50 1.4 is good too, but larger. Once, when I only had the 50 3.5 macro, and the light was low so I had to shoot some flowers and plants at 3.5, I was amazed at the bokeh: it looked like Renoir.

 

It's really a very special system.

Not much of a problem here as regards first choice - the 35-70, f3.6 zoom lens, superb build and excellent optical quality, equal to most to prime lenses. It is sometimes hard to believe that this is a zoom lens!

 

Second, the 24mm, f 2.8 wide lens . A "gem" of a little lens with superb resolution and contrast.

 

Third, the 28mm f2.8 lens, almost equal to the 24 mm lens.

 

Finally, (and this may surprise many) , the 135, f3.5 medium telephoto. I am always amazed at the quality of the photos produced by this modest little lens.

 

Need I add that all the above lenses are OM Zuiko lenses!