View Full Version : OM thread: Just bought me some ZUIKO p*rn
Just won a spanking sexy 55mm f1.2 zuiko for my OM system on feebay. The picture of it showed it with quite a bit of dust on the front element, and a smudge too, but it looks like the lighting was poor and as if it is the cleanable type, and I've been longing for one of these for a while now.
It looks like the model with the radioactive glass due to the yellow reflections in the front element, however I could be wrong. I'm really keen to see how this lens performs - I've been researching through the japanese forums and many people prefer the "character" of this lens over the better sharpness/contrast etc from the later 50 1.2. I'm certainly curious of this mythical beast (it seems that there are barely any pictures from it. The ones I have seen sure do look interesting) so I will be conducting some basic real world tests (resolution charts? don't get me started...) to determine how it performs.
It seems the western forums prefer the 50 1.2 but the japanese forums prefer it over the 50 1.2 - I suspect this is a result of circulating rumours of downfalls.
I especially will be interested to see if the lens has the reputed and much talked about "yellow cast" on its images - supposedly from its radioactive element which yellows with age.
Anybody out there with experience with this lens? I'll post up a pic when I get it.
Sounds great, congrats - I look forward to seeing pics of and with it (real shots, not test charts ;) )
oftheherd
06-18-2007, 05:53
50 f/1.2. I can only dream ...
shadowfox
06-18-2007, 09:56
Ooooh, I'm green with envy! picture of the lens as well as from the lens, please :)
Spyderman
06-18-2007, 12:19
...I must resist... I must resist... I must resist.......
excuse me for a moment... I must go visit the auction site... ;)
ClaremontPhoto
06-18-2007, 12:26
There's a Zuiko 18mm there at eBay right now.
The 55/1.2 employed Lanthanum glass, IIRC. I hate you.
Gabriel M.A.
06-18-2007, 18:19
I am offended at the use of asterisks. How dare you type characters where I wouldn't? tsk tsk tsk
;)
Oh, and enjoy. I have a 55 f/1.2 also (Canon FD) and the Canon 50 f/1.2 in LTM; dreamy. I mean, tsk tsk tsk.
giellaleafapmu
06-18-2007, 19:02
Anybody out there with experience with this lens? I'll post up a pic when I get it.
Well, I have a 55 f1.2, I have no idea whether it has a radioactive element or not (the number of the lens is 140*** if that might suggest you anything) and I don't use it really much (it might sounds a bit strange in this forum but when there is low light I normally use a tripod rather than a fast lens, but then I also like to use a view camera if I can...).
Anyway, I bought the lens because is was relatively cheap due to the rumors which yourself mentioned and because I had never had the chance to try such a fast lens.
well, I must confess that I like it quite a lot. My lens is perhaps a bit soft but I still like the way for portrait. I cannot compare with any other f1.2 lens because I never had any other but I can say, for example, that wide open I like it better than my old Nikon f1.4 (the old series) which come with my Nikon F and that I like the fact that I can shot with both eyes open.
In colour it has a very warm rendering which is also very pleasent for portrait but I don't like much for other things.
Well, without pictures to show it might be a very bad review, but I bet that you will not regret. If you are into available (lack of) light photography you will possibly want also to try the 50mm but still you will not part from this lens.
Congratulation!
GLF
The Lanthanum glass of Zuiko 55/1.2 yellows with age, hence the warmish rendition. It is the earliest of the OM 1.2 standard lenses (the other being the 50/1.2), and as such is not as good an optical formula for sharpness/resolution as later Zuiko standard lenses. But it has its place, and the "softness" can be a virtue, as GLF has discovered.
Noserider
06-18-2007, 21:03
I used to have this lens. Still wish I had it, with the OM-4t. Got rid of it all when I went to Nikon back in the early 90's and I still wish I had kept *just* that lens and body. Sigh.
From what i've read the serial numbers 135xxx and up don't have the radioactive element... not sure about that though - should be about a week and a half till I get it!
Yeah, I think maybe the later ones didn't use the radioactive glass.
jmilkins
06-19-2007, 04:33
J
It seems the western forums ... but the japanese forums ....
Congrats on the lens!
OK so there are some Oly SLR users here that have in the last week resulted in a GAS attack for me. This was reinforced after I got out my old OM1n with 50/1.4 and left the RF at home for a weekend. So I have have an Om 28/ 3.5 on the way now as well as ...oops...an 85/2 from the classifieds here ....and oops.... an Om4 (won for AU$174).
My question is - can anyone direct me to the Oly forums mentioned above? Please:)
plummerl
06-19-2007, 04:38
Congrats on the lens!
OK so there are some Oly SLR users here that have in the last week resulted in a GAS attack for me. This was reinforced after I got out my old OM1n with 50/1.4 and left the RF at home for a weekend. So I have have an Om 28/ 3.5 on the way now as well as ...oops...an 85/2 from the classifieds here ....and oops.... an Om4 (won for AU$174).
My question is - can anyone direct me to the Oly forums mentioned above? Please:)
Not sure which specific forums are being talked about above, but "the forum" (list) for me is: http://www.zuikoholic.com/
I actually typed in on google "zuiko 55 1.2" and went back quite a few pages until some japanese results came up, and then using a bit of creative clicking I managed to find some information on it.
I wouldn't think you could look for just anything ont hem though...
That OM4 was a really good deal... and that 85 f2 as well - looks to be a beautiful lens.
giellaleafapmu
06-19-2007, 07:10
From what i've read the serial numbers 135xxx and up don't have the radioactive element... not sure about that though - should be about a week and a half till I get it!
Do you mean my lens is not as nice as his...:mad:
;)
GLF
darkkavenger
06-19-2007, 07:22
I would just say OMgosh ;)
Do you mean my lens is not as nice as his...:mad:
;)
GLF
Well if the whole yellowing thing is true you'll be getting the more neutrel color balance than my radioactive one!
Do you mean my lens is not as nice as his...:mad:
;)
GLF
Well if the whole yellowing thing is true you'll be getting the more neutrel color balance than my radioactive one!
Peter_Jones
06-19-2007, 07:49
Well if the whole yellowing thing is true you'll be getting the more neutrel color balance than my radioactive one!
But lower contrast in black & white.
early 55/1.2 well regarded and sought after lens, well bought fdigital.
IGMeanwell
06-19-2007, 07:57
But lower contrast in black & white.
early 55/1.2 well regarded and sought after lens, well bought fdigital.
Attach that to any 4/3rds mount adapter (will meter as well), and you have yourself the FOV of a 110mm f1.2 ... that is one major advantage to 4/3rds sensors
Pete: Amen. People who slag the 4/3s crop factor ignore this fact. It's one reason I hang on to my 50/1.4 ... if/when a 4/3 body comes to me, a very fast "portrait" lens is already in hand.
If anyone has any 55 1.2 examples, please feel free to post them in this thread!
IGMeanwell
06-19-2007, 21:39
Pete: Amen. People who slag the 4/3s crop factor ignore this fact. It's one reason I hang on to my 50/1.4 ... if/when a 4/3 body comes to me, a very fast "portrait" lens is already in hand.
I have often thought about landing a E-1 or maybe now the E-510 (with image stabilization), purely because for weddings it would be great to have that kind of fast long lens :cool:
I have often thought about landing a E-1 or maybe now the E-510 (with image stabilization), purely because for weddings it would be great to have that kind of fast long lens :cool:
Only thing is that they lack modern primes with autofocus which makes weddings MUCH easier. Also they dont have fast zooms, and their high iso performance is very so-so.
You can get a OM-canon adapter and run it on the 5d for full frame, full viewfinder goodness. This is what I'll be doing.
IGMeanwell
06-20-2007, 02:38
Only thing is that they lack modern primes with autofocus which makes weddings MUCH easier. Also they dont have fast zooms, and their high iso performance is very so-so.
You can get a OM-canon adapter and run it on the 5d for full frame, full viewfinder goodness. This is what I'll be doing.
Don't think I am beating a 4/3rds drum because I don't actually use the system, I am a nikon user
the lens lineup is pretty good... especially if you consider the OM lenses that can be used (yes without autofocus)
http://www.4-3system.com/modules/lenses/
Olympus actually released the first constant f2 zoom lens in existence (35-100),
http://www.4-3system.com/modules/lenses/lens.php?id=15
Yes, it is expensive... but its something the other manufactures do not have and it would be great for weddings
yes, there are plenty of issues with the 4/3rds sensor (high iso performance is marginal, and dynamic range is mediocre)
shadowfox
06-20-2007, 07:41
Don't think I am beating a 4/3rds drum because I don't actually use the system, I am a nikon user
the lens lineup is pretty good... especially if you consider the OM lenses that can be used (yes without autofocus)
http://www.4-3system.com/modules/lenses/
Olympus actually released the first constant f2 zoom lens in existence (35-100),
http://www.4-3system.com/modules/lenses/lens.php?id=15
Yes, it is expensive... but its something the other manufactures do not have and it would be great for weddings
yes, there are plenty of issues with the 4/3rds sensor (high iso performance is marginal, and dynamic range is mediocre)
Impressive, for a Nikon user, you're quite versed in the Zuikology :)
I'd just want to mention something, I have an E-300, and I have a friend who is a Nikon user (D70). Between us, we can compare the results from both systems. My E-300 with OM glasses, his D70 with Nikkor AIS glasses.
As far as dynamic range, I can't tell which one is worse, both systems are worse than a properly exposed film shot for sure.
As far as color rendition, my probably Olympus-biased eyes see a more natural and pleasing skin colors on my E-300 shots. There is only one other camera that is better at rendering skin tones, IMHO, without making it too clean/sterile (like most Canon shots) that is the Olympus E-1.
Now, having said that, I'm not knocking Canon system. My brother is a Canon user, so I do have access to the images. They are vibrant and extremely clean like I said, but I personally do not like it. If I have to choose, Olympus first, then definitely Nikon, both film *and* digital.
I'm biased, too, so I agree. :D What blew me away was your shots from the Ace where the colour balance from a 1958 Zuiko lens showed the same family pedigree as OM and, I presume, ZD glass.
Chris101
07-03-2007, 09:12
Hey fdigital!
I have a geiger counter, scintillation counter and an electroscope, and access to a neutron spectrometer. If you send your lens to me for testing, I promise I'll send it back ... eventually. :D
Haha! I'm sure! nice of you to offer though!
Okay, I just took delivery of my 55 1.2 today. It is indeed a beautiful, hefty peice of glass, but still balances pretty nicely on the om2n. I'm putting a roll of pro 400h through it now, and then I'll go some reala 100 and scan the results and post them in a seperate thread. Be watching over the next few days!
I have one of these, and discover that it should be cleaned. Does anyone know how to best open it up, both from the front and rear ? It's a great lens, I use it a lot for portraits on the 5d. Mine has a yellowed front element as well.
Wow I made this thread in 2007!
I never actually posted some pics with the 55mm f1.2... It was a very interesting lens but I ended up selling it. it was rather soft at f1.2 and the bokeh was absolutely crazy. With a simple background it was gorgeous, but as soon as you put something busy behind the point of focus it would go crazy - sometimes it looked as if the bokeh was in front of the point of focus and swirling around the point.
I would love to try the 50mm f1.2 zuiko and compare - I think it would be a more consistent lens.
Wow I made this thread in 2007!
I never actually posted some pics with the 55mm f1.2... It was a very interesting lens but I ended up selling it. it was rather soft at f1.2 and the bokeh was absolutely crazy. With a simple background it was gorgeous, but as soon as you put something busy behind the point of focus it would go crazy - sometimes it looked as if the bokeh was in front of the point of focus and swirling around the point.
I would love to try the 50mm f1.2 zuiko and compare - I think it would be a more consistent lens.
I still have my 50mm f1.2 ... and the bokeh is pretty crazy IMO! :D
At some stage I'll get one of those Leitax adapters so I can try it on the D700 ... what a low light weapon that should be!
http://i56.photobucket.com/albums/g196/wheelie52/RFF%20Storage/lomax160vc_04-1.jpg
Nice. Can we see more please?
Nice. Can we see more please?
No worries ... all at f1.2 of course. No point in owning one of these if you're going to stop it down! :p
http://wheelie52.zenfolio.com/img/s5/v4/p103997802.jpg
http://i56.photobucket.com/albums/g196/wheelie52/RFF%20Storage/cafenudes_1-1.jpg
http://i56.photobucket.com/albums/g196/wheelie52/RFF%20Storage/belle_01.jpg
http://i56.photobucket.com/albums/g196/wheelie52/RFF%20Storage/lomax160vc_03.jpg
http://i56.photobucket.com/albums/g196/wheelie52/RFF%20Storage/bleverkeel290608015.jpg
The Lanthanum glass of Zuiko 55/1.2 yellows with age, hence the warmish rendition.
Is this the same as the Takumar lenses where you can 'bake' them in direct UV sunlight and 'cure' the yellowing or is it permanent with this lens?
I just noticed the title of this thread has a sanitized version of the word 'porn.'
How quaint! :D
I just found by accident a nice source of free Olympus p*rn that you can download to your own hard disc and enjoy when everyone else is sleeping...
http://www.olympus-global.com/en/fun/wallpaper/camera/
f16sunshine
03-25-2011, 08:10
I don't usually do this but, here is a porn pic from my Zuiko set before a cherry picked it and let the rest go. As to the f1.2/50 vs. F1.2/55 debate. I prefer neither over the Rokkor f1.2/58 although the little f1.2/50 is sure small compared to it's field. This image may be small it's on from the phone. :D
85398
If this is the Lanthanum glass in the lens, prevailing recommendation is to NOT carry it in either of your front jeans pockets (near either of your testicles.
I think however, that the recommendation is based on whether or not you have done your part in over-populating the world.
redisburning
03-26-2011, 20:09
No worries ... all at f1.2 of course. No point in owning one of these if you're going to stop it down! :p
funny, people say that about f1.4, f1.8, and even f2.8 for those people married to zooms.
I put my rokkor on f2 like a boss.
p.s. I've just made enemies with half of FM's alt forum just by twisting the aperture ring one click.
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.