Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/02/08
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I still have the OM 50/2 macro and the 90/2 macro in the drawer. The 90/2 is not as good as the 90/2 AA wide open, but the 50/2 gives the summicron a run for the money. In terms of creamy bokeh, the 90/2 OM is as good as anything ever. At 02:38 AM 2/8/2007, Marty Deveney wrote: >OT, maybe, but magnificent, both the photo and the lens. The photo is >simple, elegant and incredibly well balanced. > >Leica make magnificent lenses, but they've never made anything like the >Zuiko 100/2. It's arguably as good as the Leica M and R 90/2 asphs, but >it focuses closer. A lot closer. And it is just as good right up close >as it is further away. It focuses to "it should probably be called >'macro' " close, but Oly didn't call it that because the 90/2 focused >even closer. > >It's one of the few fast, short teles that excels wide open, up close, >enlarged big. This lens and the 90/2 were both unflatteringly sharp >portrait lenses. There are others as good, but none of them focus as >close. Anything that focuses as close isn't as fast. The f2 Zuiko >macros were stunning designs, let down only by really mediocre >multicoating, which Olympus didn't seem to master until sometime in the >1990s. It's really a shame that Oly gave up making lenses like this. // richard (This email is for mailing lists. To reach me directly, please use richard at imagecraft.com)