Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
next PZ lens test report: Olympus M.Zuiko 60mm f/2.8 ED macro
[quote name='you2' timestamp='1360587801' post='21894']

Doh --

Thank you for the link to that alternative review. As I read it he prefers the 60mm over the 50mm; stating that 60mm is a better macro lens in all ways and having better contrast and central sharpness as a general lens; with the one weakness of softer corners (when used as a general lens). My reading is that while he acknowledge that it is weaker than the 50mm in this one area in other areas it is better making it his preference (at least that was how I interpreted his words)[/quote]

I'm not sure I read it this way. I mean, I don't really read reviews from people like Potka/Wong/Hogan/etc, there seems to be very serious conflict of interest with those bloggers and they tend to gloss over most of the new gear they receive from manufacturers hence are biased by default and almost never say anything bad about stuff they review. It's pretty much always "buy this new toy as soon as possible" with those dudes. So he might actually write that he "prefers the 60/2.8" (and there are good reasons to prefer it over the older lens — it's smaller, has faster AF, doesn't need any adapter and goes to 1:1)...

Sometimes there are pictures in those reviews though, and those might tell a different story. Potka says that 60/2.8 is slightly better in the center than 50/2 but I don't see it in his pictures, the crops look pretty much the same to me. I do see the difference at the edges though, 50/2 is clearly better than 60/2.8. It's also known that 50/2 is virtually free of chromatic aberrations and 60/2.8 is slightly worse here.

And regarding close-up performance.. this is quite difficult to compare for different focal length lenses, so not really obvious whether 60/2.8 is actually better here than 50/2. With such a narrow DOF technique is everything and I'm not sure Potka's good at it. At f/5.6 and narrower apertures the 50/2 looks sharper to me which might indicate that at wider apertures the area we're looking at is just simply not in focus.

In any case, I don't have access to 60/2.8 and can't compare these 2 myself, but all the pictures and numbers I see on the internet indicate that 50/2 is slightly better optically than 60/2.8 in pretty much every aspect (except distortion, but the difference is within the margin of error).

Messages In This Thread
next PZ lens test report: Olympus M.Zuiko 60mm f/2.8 ED macro - by H. J. Simpson - 02-11-2013, 03:01 PM

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)