Author Topic: Olympus Zuiko Auto-S 50mm f/1.8 (OM mount) Lens Samples ***** (Read 12607 times)

gareth · « **on:** March 10, 2010, 06:14:11 AM »

We tend to post picture samples from our favorite lenses.
IMHO, it's equally important to post pictures from lenses which are not up to our expectations so that peers would not waste time and money on them.
I would like to share my thoughts about this OMZ 50/1.8.

Not being a veteran OM user, I was enlightened by E-P2.
Naturally I would like to seek its root and try using old OM prime lenses on PEN.
Searching Flickr, it seems that most OM users have a copy of this prime lens.
It should not go wrong if so many people are keeping it.
I got one from a local seller.
The lens elements were clean. The build was solid. Aperture and focusing ring smooth. Everything looked fine.
I bought an adapter afterward.
I was baffled by the first indoor f/1.8 shot - Why couldn't I focus at all? Everything was just a blur.
I have a number of 50mm primes for use in PEN.
It's the first time ever I saw things like this.
I checked again and again - the lens / the adapter.
I even went back to my acquainted shop to test several different copies of adapters.
Same results.

f/2.8

I searched the internet again, including keywords like "OM 50 1.8 soft".
It then came to my attention that it's common to see "ghosting" for OM lenses at wide open in M4/3 PEN.
http://www.biofos.com/cornucop/omz_ep1.html

As a matter of fact, I think it's too soft to be usable at all.
It's not that kind of soft focus.
I just cannot differentiate the edges of details and thus have no way to tell whether it's in focus or not.

f/1.8

To me, I think the sharpness is reasonable for use only at and smaller than f/5.6.

f/4

f/5.6

We can't always have bright sunlight to use f/16, can we?

f/16

f/16

The lens on E-P2, by the way ...

I know there is a chance that my copy is a true lemon.
Do you have this lens to see if the results are different?

shtang8 · « **Reply #1 on:** March 10, 2010, 09:40:54 AM »

I believe you have a bad copy. I don't think any prime would give you a blur image like the 2.8 bench you shot.

gareth · « **Reply #2 on:** March 10, 2010, 05:21:45 PM »

I fully realize the possibility of a lemon copy.
However, the lens elements look fine.
The haze / blur does not extend over the whole range of f-stops.
Therefore, I think that it's not lens mal-alignment or lens elements problems.
Sharpness at or beyond f/5.6, though not great, is acceptable as in a so-so lens.
I just can't figure out what physical property can account for this curiosity.
I have had several deals with the seller before.
In addition with the comments he received from others in the past, I trust that he's a worthy seller.
In retrospect, Peter also had concerns on the softness in his OMZ 50/1.4.
http://e-p1.net/index.php?topic=1369.msg11144#msg11144
That's why I want to seek advice from other OMZ 50/1.8 owners.

Of course, the next thing I want to test with this lens is to place it on another m4/3 PEN or a GF-1.

cosinaphile · « **Reply #3 on:** March 10, 2010, 10:59:07 PM »

i have a 50 1.8 om on my om1n and i assure you its better than that lens , i think you have a case of misallignment . i never saw anything near that softness or blur on film
alas i dont haver an om adapter or i would compare

i realize that slr lenses in the final analysis are a compromise on micro 4\3, however most that are good remain good on the new format , not the same but very good sometime superb . i dont think this is typical performance for that lens

gareth · « **Reply #4 on:** March 11, 2010, 01:10:12 AM »

Hi Cosinaphile,

Thanks for the comments.
Pity that you do not have the OM/m43 adapter now.
Please post the results from your lens if you have the adapter in future.
Thanks in advance.

Gareth

gareth · « **Reply #5 on:** March 12, 2010, 05:40:09 AM »

I think the conclusion is that the copy is a lemon.
I suggest voyager move the thread out of sample section to lenses section as an anecdotal experience.

whatkatiedoes · « **Reply #6 on:** March 12, 2010, 06:15:47 AM »

I have this lens and have never had these problems, here are some samples (all wide open).

I do find the 28mm f2.8 soft and impossible to focus, though.

edit: added some more samples.

Finder · « **Reply #7 on:** March 12, 2010, 06:26:17 AM »

I say we keep all the photos here as it is instructive to show that a lens may not work because it is a poor example. whatkatiedoes' photo shows how a good example works.

gareth · « **Reply #8 on:** March 12, 2010, 07:14:02 AM »

Thanks Katie for the lens samples.
They give me back the confidence in OMZ lenses.
BTW, I adore your cat more and more.

Agree with Finder.

cosinaphile · « **Reply #9 on:** March 12, 2010, 08:52:19 AM »

wonderful concert shots katie, some of the best ive seen posted with micro 4\3

whatkatiedoes · « **Reply #10 on:** March 12, 2010, 09:06:48 AM »

Thanks a lot cosinaphile, i practice with different lenses every gig i go to - i find this 50mm is an excellent concert lens.

and thanks gareth, i love him more every day too

Funkmon · « **Reply #11 on:** March 14, 2010, 06:01:35 AM »

When I first got this lens ($15, $10 for adapter), I got it just to have a manual aperture, fast lens for video on my Canon, and maybe just some fun. I was testing it with some photos, and I could never get the focus right at 1.8! It's really hard! I have to put the camera in live view and magnify to get the focus right, because it's an insanely shallow DOF.

Are we sure it's not a DOF problem?

And does anyone want to see sample shots from an APS-C DSLR instead of an MFT?

Malo1961 · « **Reply #12 on:** April 01, 2010, 01:19:44 PM »

Well...I received my adapter and Zuiko 1.8/50 yesterday and made a couple of test shots.
Nothing special, but only to see if everything works properly.

This is how the package looks, with adapter and hood attached.

I must say, it balances well on my E-P1

The next two are taken wide open at F 1.8, tripod, 2 sec self timer.

focus on the stem of the first fruit decoration.

focus on the eyes.

Next two are at F2.8 , tripod, 2 sec. self timer.

So...I can say I recognise nothing in the words / experience of the OP.
I think they look pretty good from a sharpness point of view. For the rest they are rubbish. LOL

large examples can be watched at the following link:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/martin_lochmans_photography/sets/72157623742164412/

Burkey · « **Reply #13 on:** April 14, 2010, 03:09:02 PM »

Just got my OM to MFT adapter. I've mounted up a 50/1.8 I had bought some time ago on eBay for less than $30. I'm very pleased with the initial results. UV filter and hood are on way. Here's a quick shot I did with our son this afternoon on the porch. The sun was in his eyes so the pose is far from perfect. I believe I shot this wide open at ISO 400. Processed in LR2.6 and CS4. Conversion to B+W done in CS4. The glow is interesting. Sorta' has a vintage look. More tests to follow.
. . . Burkey

Burkey · « **Reply #14 on:** August 14, 2010, 07:12:56 AM »

Another OM 50/1.8 Example. My son restringing one of his "pride 'n joys". ISO320, 1/160, F1.8.

A 100% Crop. Admittedly, during PP in LR2.7 I sharpened the image slightly more than I normally do. Typical "sharp" setting runs around "48" for me with both the E-P2 and my M8. This photo I bumped up to "68". Still, a very useable lens. A bit of "glow" too.

Zenfolio issues still there. 'Hope you folks can see these images.
. . . Burkey

adash · « **Reply #15 on:** August 14, 2010, 08:24:39 AM »

Quote

A bit of "glow" too.

These trend to glow, but different examples glow differently. Mine glows almost as much as your does, but I have seen much worse.

Good photo and good guitar! I always recommend the OMZ 50/1.8 for low light and for a "portrait" lens.

winx14 · « **Reply #16 on:** October 06, 2010, 06:52:46 PM »

some shots from my san diego trip using the 50mm f1.8 MIJ on a P1. used a 2-stop nd filter because it was pretty damn sunny out.

adash · « **Reply #17 on:** October 06, 2010, 08:37:42 PM »

Pretty nice! Thanks for sharing!

Redwinematthew · « **Reply #18 on:** November 24, 2010, 01:31:31 PM »

Those pictures are brilliant, I am just ordering an adpater now to use an om 50mm on an ep1, but how do you all focus? Using the lcd screen magnified? Thanks

winx14 · « **Reply #19 on:** December 01, 2010, 07:57:45 AM »

i think magnification is the only way to use manual focus. i must admit, it is a lot easier to manual focus on the e-p2 with a view finder. with the e-p1, i was always leaning on something to stabilize my hands.

sirlylos · « **Reply #20 on:** December 22, 2010, 09:14:57 AM »

I actually just use the manual focus without the zoom and I've had some good results, you kinda get used to just using the screen.

asterinex · « **Reply #21 on:** March 02, 2011, 07:48:14 AM »

Finally I have an OM to M4/3 adapter. I first ordered one in China, but never arrived.
These pictures are taken with Olympus E-P1. The lens is Olympus Zuiko Auto 50mm 1.8.
I found it easy to focus (manually) with help of the screen. Even without magnification. After reading a lot of stuff I was surprised about the focussing.
But fair is fair, in bright sunlight it is difficult to see something on the display,and you need a lot of time to focus. Action shots are difficult

I think this is a great lens with great results. But sometimes the bokeh is to harsh.
Here are some samples :

Details