4/3 Lens build quality

I heard a lot about zuiko digital lenses for Olympus 4/3 SLR system, and I have unusual question. Are Hi-end Zuiko lenses (like 150 2.0, 7-14, 35-100) as good mechanically as old MF Zeiss, Leica, Zuiko, Nikkor ect. ?

How good are they compared to Canon L's and Top Nikkor lenses?

I mean smooth and well-damped focus ring, solid feel...
I'm crazy about well-built lenses... so forgive me.

I can only answer for the 35-100/f2, as its the only one i Own af that lineup you mentioned.

The build quality matches the Canon L series, no doubt, I haven't seen a better build lens.
--
Jens Holm

jensendk said:

I can only answer for the 35-100/f2, as its the only one i Own af
that lineup you mentioned.

The build quality matches the Canon L series, no doubt, I haven't
seen a better build lens.
--
Jens Holm

Click to expand...

Thanks!

but i'm more interested in comparison between old MF and ZD.
How does it feel?

I have only ZD 7-14/4.0 from the top profi line.
For comparison I have several old MF Nikkors (from 24/2.8 to180/2.8).

The ZD 7-14/4.0 is the best lens I have ever had, from both optical and mechanical quality. Cannot compare too much to Canon L lenses, one of my friends has one, and I ten to like my ZD 7-14/4.0 more

--
pka
http://www.karlach.net/

As I wrote in my previous post my ZD 7-14/4.0 feels absolutely perfect.

It is heavy and very solid built. It compares in terms of weight and feel to my MF Nikkor 135/2.0, 180/2.8 ED or 105/2.5- ZD is never, so feels better

maratus said:

but i'm more interested in comparison between old MF and ZD.
How does it feel?

Click to expand...

pka
http://www.karlach.net/

maratus said:

but i'm more interested in comparison between old MF and ZD.
How does it feel?

Click to expand...

old MF lenses are different. They do use lots od metal in the construction and focusing and zoo rings are often quite stiff, you have DOF scales engravend and so on.

The top pro lenses are not the same. They use lots of polycarbonat and similar stuff to keep weight down, the manual focus ring drives the AF motor, you have short travel ways for the IF system (to give fast AF), close focus is usually much better (floating lens element construction), you have weather seals, built in microchips, sensors, motors and so on....

Older lenses also often use much less lens elements and imho the modern multi element designs are often superior especially in sharpness, microcontrast and CA control. Bokeh is sometimes better on older lenses with less elements...

maratus said:

but i'm more interested in comparison between old MF and ZD.
How does it feel?

Click to expand...

In basic construction, and in zoom feel, the top ZD lenses are definitely as good as old mechanical lenses. They feel a little less massive, per unit of volume, because the metal alloys used in their production are lighter. But they're not weaker and the precision of the fit is at least as good -- in most cases, better (comparing here to good Nikon, Canon, Olympus et. al MF lenses, not necessarily Leica, whose mechanical fit/finish has always been unreal.)

But if you're asking about the feel of the focus ring (i.e. when focussing manually), that's a different story. No modern AF lens, no matter how well built, feels like a good manual focus lens. Those old lenses had helicoid focusing barrels, and the new AF lenses use rack-and-pinion or piezoelectric focusing mechanisms. They don't feel anywhere near as good as old MF lenses, no doubt, and there's nothing that can be done about it. I miss helicoid focusing very much.

peripheralfocus said:

In basic construction, and in zoom feel, the top ZD lenses are
definitely as good as old mechanical lenses.

Click to expand...

snip>

peripheralfocus said:

But if you're asking about the feel of the focus ring (i.e. when
focussing manually), that's a different story.

Click to expand...

Very much what I was going to say. My experience on high-end lenses is mostly with Nikon, but none of the modern lenses I've handled have the silky smooth feel of the older Leica or even Nikon lenses. Many of rhe new lenses have a sort of plastic "notchy" feel which I find really annoying.

On the other hand, I'm confident we have better performing lenses today than ever before, and often for less money. Modern materials and manufacturing techniques let makers build more complex lenses to tighter tolerances, and still keep price reasonable.

--
J.R.

Somewhere south of Amarillo

http://fotolocus.com

From the top line I have the 7-14 and the 150/2. Both are absolutely terrific. For comparision I have a couple of older Nikkors from the early 80's. The silky mechanical feel of the Nikkors is not there, mainly because the new lenses are no longer purely mechanical. But I actually think the new lenses are even better in build quality.

The 150/2 is a beast. If anything would survive a crash, that's the one.

--
Jeff

Thank you!

The 7-14 I own is better built than either the 17-40L or 70-200 f4L Canon I used to use. Heavy-duty constriction and wonderful feeling controls. Now, I don't know if I've ever had a lens from any SLR maker that felt as sweet as the focus motion of a 35mm Summicron for a Leica rangefinder, but the Zuiko premium glass optically takes a back seat to no one.There are parts of the performance, like compared to Canon's USM motors, where Zuiko performance is not as good, but that should go without saying.

Gregm61 said:

The 7-14 I own is better built than either the 17-40L or 70-200 f4L
Canon I used to use. Heavy-duty constuction and wonderful feeling
controls.

Click to expand...

and here are som examples of how it performs:

http://gmchappell.smugmug.com/gallery/1207184#122785446

I was a film Nikonian for years, and became spoiled on the build quality of the better Nikkors. In their day, there was nothing finer - at a comparable price anyway.

The better ZD lenses I have: 14-54, 50-200, 50 Macro, all have the same rock solid, rattle free feel. And they match that with image quality. I put the mighty 50-200 up against one of my old Nikkors: 200 3.5 EDIF (using an adapter to get it on my E1), and pixel peeping revealed that the 50-200 was just a tad bit sharper. When a zoom can best a prime, it's doing well.

ZD lenses are all focus by wire - the focus ring activates the focus motor. Doesn't quite have that silky feel of an old Nikkor, but you get used to it quickly enough.

Granted, the better ZD lenses are pricey, but you get your money's worth. They have never disappointed me.