jamie_costello

I don't think that multi-coating is everything and I wouldn't be so quick to trash the lenses you have just to acquire the "best" optics - whatever that may be.

 

I think you'll find that there are a number of people who prefer the single-coated lenses for a number of reasons; mostly having to do with how the photographs actually look, not how they should theoretically look.

 

Flare resistance may or may not be a real problem for how you make photographs. It is the only real advantage that I can see for multi-coated. In flare-prone situations, I use a lens hood - or my hand. At the risk of offering a "glittering generality", I would observe that contrast changes considerably with multi-coating; that's not always a good thing. It depends upon your photographic style, what you shoot, and the films you use.

 

The single-coated 100/2.8 enjoys a good reputation, while the SC 50/1.4 generally does not. But that has more to do with design than the coatings. If you shoot B&W, try a roll of Ilford Delta 400 with your 100/2.8 and check out how it presents the highlights. I think you'll be pleased.

 

I have most of the Zuiko "big glass". The 35/2 has a tendency to vignette wide-open, but is otherwise a good, sharp lense. The 90/2 IS heavy and the aperture ring is back at the camera end of the lens, not toward the filter ring like most Zuikos (very difficult for me to get used to). The 100/2 is not as heavy - and not as sharp. They are different lenses.

 

I use my 50/1.8 MIJ a lot more than I ever did. I use a 24/2.8 where my 21/2 is too wide. You get the picture?

 

This was not meant to be a lecture - just a plea. Get to know your existing lenses and their respective strengths and weaknesses before you go on a quest for elusive "big glass".

 

I wish I did.

As stated, "n" means "new". The 1n and 2n replaced the 1 and 2, respectively in 1979. The most significant change was the ability to use the then-new T-series flash, albeit at a fixed 1/60th sec. sync speed. Using Shoe 4, the OM-2n set to "auto" with a T-series flash was fully automated with OTF "off-the-film" flash exposure.

 

"S" (or "SP" in the non-U.S.) meant "spot meter" and only applied to the OM-2S. There were a couple of variants to the OM-3 and OM-4 that used titanium top plates and bottom plates; these were the OM-3T/4T (or Ti in non-U.S.).

 

It seems that product differentiation is the key to getting consumers to pony up for new stuff even when the old stuff works well. Gee, that almost sounded profound ... Nahhh ;-).

Kenny, Great Shot! I'm guessing that you took the photo of the island from about the midpoint of the G.G. Bridge at about 1:00 in the afternoon? Is that Oakland in the background?

Jim wrote: " ... If you have any advice to offer on the road I'm about to take I'd like to hear it".

 

Plain and simple - you need more stuff ;-). You have an OM-2. You now need to have a 2n and 2s. The 2n just looks so darned cool (uses the T-series TTL flash system, too) and the 2s has real spot metering, Series-2 focusing screen capability and a separate TTL port for off-camera flash.

 

Both the 35/2.8 and 28/2.8 ave good reps. Personally, if I go wide, I go to 21 and 24, but that's just a personal choice. I use a 35/2 for small groups.

 

Check out either KEH (www.keh.com) or oBoy for the screens. I don't see 1-5s come up that often, though.

I am not sure Henry that the "issue" with these lenses is strictly how they perform on a test. Remember that many of these lenses are now at least ten or more years old. The real issue is longevity that derives from build quality. There is no doubt that significant portions of the Cosina-built lenses are plastic and that does seem to directly affect the length of time that a lens will performed as designed.

Henry, the 70-210/4.5-5.6 was paired with the 35-70/3.5-4.8 for the Cosina-produced camera, the OM2000. They are "S" Zuikos - the budget line. All were built by Cosina, and not generally thought to be up to typical Oly standards for build quality. They are not to be confused with the 35-70/3.5-4.5 produced by Oly as an "S" zoom which has a fairly good rep. This is not to say that Cosina doesn't build nice cameras and lenses. The new Voightlander Bessa R2 and the lenses that accompany it are thought to be outstanding and that product appears to be enticing people back into rangefinder phtography who don't want to pay Le*ca/C*ntax/Nik*n prices. Side note: Cosina-Voightlander also makes a wonderful 40/2 in OM mount for about two-thirds of what the Oly version costs.

[Continuing with reddened face] .... uh, that is if I HAD a "37-70" zoom ;-).

[shaking head sadly] Henry, Henry, Henry. Repeat after me, "My name is Henry ... and I am a Zuikoholic". It's not that you want another 50mm, you neeeeeed it!

 

I've been flailing away at 35mm with Olys for about twenty years now. The original 50/1.8 that I got on an OM-1 was permanently disfigured by a baggage-handling simian in the early 80's. It simply gave me the excuse to become a Zuikoholic. Now, please be assured that I CAN stop anytime ... really ... I can. But why?

 

The latest version of the 50/1.8, the "Made in Japan" or "MIJ" is the sharpest standard 1.8 lens they've made. I have a motley collection of 5 of them, most having come as "body caps", but I fairly jumped at the chance to purchase one recently NIB. It has wonderful contrast, as well. It beats "hands-down" (IMO) any of the <1,080,000 1.4's (Iknow I'll get quite a thrashing for that one). In many ways, it is superior to my black-nosed 55/1.2 which tends to go soft at the corners. I have not had the chance to compare it to a newer 50/1.2, but the 1.8 compares quite favorably with it in Gary Reese's lens tests.

 

Face it: for 1/35th the cost of a 40/2, you've got a great walking-around lens. I keep coming back to it. I now even favor it over a 37-70 zoom. Give in ;-).