Zuiko 50mm 1.8 varaints - question

Discussion in 'Olympus' started by last year's man, Dec 7, 2005.

  1. Hi all...

    I have the chance to replace my old and rather beaten up 50mm 1.8 with
    a new one, and am being offered the following two variants (both for
    virtually nothing):

    Zuiko Auto-S 'made in Japan' (5125934) - no MC designation

    Zuiko MC Auto-S 'Japan' (3164115)

    Anyone got an opinion on which is likely to be the best performer?
    I've read that 'made in japan' models are supposed to be 'the best',
    but does this include those that are not marked MC?

    Thanks for any help
  2. It's not super critical in a 50/1.8, but an MC lens is better than a single coated lens. But not all MC Zuikos are marked "MC".

    The original, SINGLE-coated 50/1.8 is marked "F. Zuiko". If it doesn't have the "F." then it's multi-coated... whether it says "MC" or not.
  3. The 'made in Japan' version is indeed supposed to be best of all, although it has a plastic aperture ring. AFAIK every 'made in Japan' lens is multicoated even though there is no MC mark. The earlier 'Japan' versions are not as highly regarded and may be more prone to a particular curse of this lens - sticky blades.
  4. "made in Japan" lenses are the top of the heap in quality vs. all the other 50/1.8's. You probably can't go wrong with that one unless it's a lemon. All the "miJ" lenses were MC, only early, silver-nosed lenses were single coated.

    FYI, I have seen individual earlier MC lenses that were superior to the latest miJ examples. That's a rare case, though.

  5. I'd go for the made in Japan version too. I'm very, very happy with mine. Plus advice from this forum and elsewhere recommends it.
  6. I have heard the MIJ version with serial numbers above 5,000,000 are considered the best. I have one and like it very much. I think it may be a bit better than my f1.4 (MC later version). I would get the MIJ lens. BTW, the 50mm f2 beats them both, but will cost you over ten times more.

  7. The later multicoated lens is likely to give crisper results with more contrast and lower flare, but some people argue that older lenses have attractive qualities, particularly for black & white.

    Why not acquire both if they're so cheap? You can then try them side-by-side. That way you will be able to decide which you prefer.
  8. Jordan - All things being equal, I doubt if you will tell the difference. I have a couple of both, and in normal use, with prints up to 900x600, I can't tell them apart.
  9. My old SC 50/1,8 gives beautiful, creamy photos. They are more "soulful" then my newest hi-tech lenses. So I just don't change my 50.

Share This Page