Lens for an OM-1

[luisarguelles]

Hi all, I'm primarily a Leica-M user, but also have two OM-1 bodies.

In fact, I think the OM-1 should have been the reflex that Leica

should have made. So far so good. What is the best OM lens in the 35

to 50mm range, that is, which one of the following lenses is the best:

35mm f/2, 35mm f/2.8, 50mm f/1.2, 50mm f/1.4, 50mm f/1.8 or 50mm f/2

Macro?

[alan_krantz]

50/2 macro

[skip_williams]

Agreed that the 50/2 Macro is definitely the best lens in that range. But it's also pricey (from an OM persepective) at aroud $3-400.

 

A close second is the 50/1.8 mij (reads "made in japan", in lower case letters, on the front bezel ring). This is the best of the 50mm normal lenses made for the OM series. And you can usually find them for $20-30.

 

The 50/1.4 is OK in its later versions, but the earlier lenses were mediocre.

 

The 50/1.2 is nice and has nice bokeh. Also a bit expensive at $2-250. Focusing is a chore at close distances.

 

35's? I sold my f/2 and kept the f/2.8, which is better overall except for the speed. I never liked the shots from my f/2.0, and it had it for 10 years.

 

Skip

[lex_jenkins]

The "best" is a relative term.

 

The best buy in a normal lens is the 50mm f/1.8 Zuiko, specifically the last variant marked "Made in Japan". Zuikoholics jokingly refer to this as the "see-through body cap" but it's actually a very good lens.

 

The sharpest normal lens is the 50mm f/2 macro, which is rated as being comparable to the best Leica glass. However it is a macro lens which means it's not the best choice for all around photography. Most macro lenses spread 75%-90% of their focus throw (ring rotation) to cover from minimum focus/maximum reproduction ratio, to around 5 feet. The final 10%-25% of rotation is crammed to cover from around 5 feet to infinity, making fine focus difficult at other than close up distances. Also, macro lenses seldom have the best bokeh, which is something prized among many Zuikos (and Leica lenses).

 

The later variant in the 50mm f/1.4 is also an excellent buy today. I recently bought one in top condition for around $40. The same lens was selling for around $100 several years ago when I first considered buying one. One stop down from maximum aperture it performs as well as any Zuiko. Wide open it's sharp enough for some purposes, such as casual portraiture, and the bokeh is beautiful.

 

The 50mm f/1.2 is probably as good as any f/1.2 lens available in this price range. Nothing wrong with it if you need or just want a very fast lens.

 

I don't know about the 35mm Zuikos. My next widest Zuiko is the 28mm f/2.8 multicoated version, which is very good.

[luisarguelles]

Skip, I already have a Zuiko 50mm f/1.8, but it says "made in Japan", with only the "J" in upper case. Is it good?

[skip_williams]

Hmmm. I thought the "mij" lenses were all lower case letters; but I could be wrong though. If it says the text on the front ring, and it's a black nose, then it's definitely in the good range.

 

Skip

[simon evans.]

The 'Made in Japan' version of the 50/1.8 is good, but I would suggest you try the multicoated version of the 50/1.4. I prefer the look of this lens, particularly for people pictures. It's hardly any bigger, takes the same 49mm filter thread and is still very reasonably priced.

 

The 35/2 and 35/2.8 are both good but unspectacular performers. I have been very pleased with the results from my beaten-up single-coated 2.8.

[lex_jenkins]

If it says made in Japan, regardless of u/l case, it's probably the latter, better variant of the 50/1.8. I dropped mine a couple of years ago, rendering it inoperable so I tossed it out - otherwise I'd check to confirm the label. Good as it was, repairing it wasn't cost effective. I used my 50/3.5 Zuiko macro for a couple of years as an all-purpose lens, and finally got a 50/1.4 MC this year for my niece, who's borrowing my OM kit while she studies b&w photography. If she stays serious I'll give her the lot. I'll miss it dearly but it'll be nice to see it have a good home where I can visit it occasionally.

[jim_covill]

I own the 35f2, 50f1.4, 50f1.8(mij), and a 55f1.2(single coated). The 55's a pig in terms of size/weight but I really like the viewfinder brightness. That said, the 50f1.4 is a pretty good overall lens and offers good camera balance. The 35f2 a bit something - the images don't jump at you.

 

At the risk of playing the devils advocate, the very rare and very expensive 40mm pancake lens has the repuation as a excellent lens.

[jack_lo_..._t_o]

I love the bokeh in this one:<div></div>

[jack_lo_..._t_o]

This was at 5.6:<div></div>

[jack_lo_..._t_o]

50 1.8 mc, my third 1.8 and only mc. Sure surprised me when I took it for a spin:<div></div>

[jack_lo_..._t_o]

I generally agree that the 35 2.8 isn't exactly a summicron, but it did give me this:<div></div>

[jack_lo_..._t_o]

I have to say too, that I love the colour rendition of Zuiko lenses.

 

Also: I have an OM-1 but it's mostly as a mechanical backup to my OM-2s on automatic. At the low prices both of them fetch I think it's the wiser choice.

[saotome_genma]

<P>You should also consider the <a href="http://www.cameraquest.com/Voigt%20SL.htm#Voigtlander%2040/2%20Ultron%20Aspherical" target=_blank>Voigtlander 40mm f2</a>.

[lex_jenkins]

Generally the bokeh of the 50mm f/3.5 Zuiko macro isn't anything special. Pretty much the same any any macro lens - the optical design pretty much precludes great bokeh.

 

The exception is the distance factor. When the reproduction ratio is near maximum and the background is relatively far away - preferably several feet - bokeh will appear better. The smaller the aperture the more important it is that the background be reasonably far away. Sunlight dappled foliage, stems, twigs, leaves, etc., can make a mess of the background, creating major distractions.

 

But bokeh is never a precise thing. There are too many variables involved.

[luisarguelles]

Saotome, thanks a lot. I didn't know the Voigtländer was available for the OM mount. That looks really interesting.<div></div>

[john_fleetwood]

I shoot Leica and OM, too, and I love the Zuiko 50/1.8 "miJ."<div></div>

[robert_grasing]

I've read and heard very good things about the Voigtlander 40/2 (and also the 75/2.5). However, unfortunately they focus in the opposite direction. Also, Cosina announced in their catalog that they intended to make only one production run of these lenses in OM, PK, etc mounts and when sold out, that would be the end of it. They continue to make them in the old Praktica/Pentax screw mount and the Nikon SLR bayonet.

[anders_gelbheit]

I can second the positive views on the CV 40mm/2.0. I have one in Nikon mount, and it's excellent. It has a round aperture at 5.6 and very smooth bokeh throughout, for those who care. It's very sharp and contrasty and very well made; in fact, built quality is on par with my Nikkors.

[grahams]

I have three 50/1.8 "mij", four plain MC 50/1.8 and one 50/1.4 MC and I'm damned if I have noticed any practical difference between any of them, and I print 16X20. All give superb results, very good resolution and high contrast at any stop from f2.8 down. I once thought to test them all so as to only use the "best" of the bunch on my user bodies, but I soon realised that I was chasing ghosts. There will always be measurable variations between production samples, but I have yet to be able to identify the 50mm lens that a particular shot was taken with by looking at the print.<div></div>