Skip to content

Photographic greatness: Olympus OM Zuiko 50mm f/1.4

zuiko-50b-7

It is difficult to explain in words what makes a great lens, and impossible to define it with numbers and charts. Quantitative measurements are the essence of science. The purpose of a photographic lens is to generate a beautiful image, and beauty is not a scientific concept. So how are we to judge the greatness of a lens? And what does greatness mean, anyway? I don’t know that these questions have answers, but I will attempt to explain why I feel this way about the Zuiko 50mm f/1.4. The “scientific” qualities of this lens are well known and well documented. It is almost universally respected as one of the top fast primes of the last golden days of 35mm film photography. I will not review any of this information here – what would be the purpose of simply transcribing what others have documented so thoroughly? I will simply try to explain why I feel so strongly about this lens – why this is a lens that I will never, ever, part with.

My particular copy is one of the very last multicoated examples, with serial number in the 1100000’s. It is in pristine optical and mechanical condition. Reading about the history of this lens one comes across some different opinions. Everybody seems to agree that it is an excellent lens, but there appear to be differences of opinion about the relative merits of the various versions of it. There are those who suggest that my particular version is the summit, but there are also those who believe that the differences among the various multicoated versions, and even relative to the earlier “G.Zuiko” lenses, are not all that important. I honestly don’t know. This is the only one I have ever had. And numbers on charts don’t tell the story I wish to tell. There are also opinions to the effect that the humble f/1.8 50mm Zuiko is sharper. I had one for a while, and to me they looked comparably sharp, which says a lot about the slower and cheaper Zuiko kit lens. But sharpness is not all, and when it comes to lens greatness, the 1.4 is in a league of its own. I sold the 1.8 not because it is not an excellent lens – it is – but because I knew that having the 1.4 I would never use the 1.8

Words are inadequate to distill the essence of a lens, to describe what makes it (or not) great. Some words are necessary, however, to at least try to explain what I see and why what I see touches me in a certain way. But words best come after images, so here are a few, all of them taken with my 50mm f/1.4 Zuiko.

What is the first word that comes to mind after seeing these images? If you thought “versatility” then you are seeing what I am seeing. The images that I chose as examples include close ups, intimate landscapes and wide grand landscapes. They were shot with Micro Four Thirds, APS-C and full frame cameras. And what they show is the characteristically “sweet” rendition of this lens. It is sharp, very sharp, but it is not surgical. Hexanons tend to be surgical lenses. I like them very much too, and I will be writing about them in the near future. Zeiss Contax and Zeiss Jena lenses are also in my favorite list. They are spectacularly sharp, more so than Hexanons, and somewhat less surgical, less harsh. The 50mm 1.4 Zuiko is balanced. It manages to be sharp and at the same time very gentle. Was this unique combination of characteristics a conscious design decision, or a lucky outcome? Who knows. Does it matter? The 24mm f/2.8 Zuiko shares some of these traits, and it is another of my favorite lenses. Other Zuikos are remarkably sharp but less distinctive (e.g. the 18mm f3.5, 21 mm f/35, and 100mm f/2.8). Perhaps the faster f/2 siblings of some of these Zuikos have the unique rendition of the 50mm f/1.4. I don’t know as I have not used them, and I am not likely to be able to afford them.

Here is what I think. Rather than try to use words to define what a great lens is, I will use the OM Zuiko 50mm f/1.4 as the definition, or at least as part of the definition. If a lens can match it in its balance of “gentle” sharpness, consistence, versatility and color rendition, then in my book it will also be a great lens. There are many excellent, superb, magnificent manual focus lenses out there. How many of them are truly great? I have been lucky to amass a growing collections of Zuikos, Zeisses, Hexanons, Pentacons and Fujis. I will be back with more.

 

25 Comments

  1. I appreciated your articles on your site.
    I’m an A7 owner (and a Zuiko lover!) and I’m agree with your words.
    All the best,
    Fabrizio

    • Thank you for your visit, Fabrizio. Always good to meet fellow Zuikomaniacs, and Sony FF has given them the new life they deserve!!

  2. […] and bokeh. The Fuji is, by comparison, more of a quiet country walk. It is also different from the Zuiko 50mm f/1.4 which I still think of as the most perfectly balanced 50mm lens that I have tried, in terms of […]

  3. Matt Matt

    Hi Alberto,

    Enjoying your lens reviews of these Zuiko classics – I too have a late serial # 50/1.4 and it really is a gem of a lens, the best fast fifty I’ve used for certain. It is currently glued to my OM-1, but I also use it as the middle lens in a trio comprised also of the 24/2.8 and 85/2. A perfect set to travel with!

    Just bought the 18/3.5 which I am looking forward to trying out too!

    • Thanks for your visit & comment, Matt. I love all Zuikos, and the 50/1.4 is an impressive lens. Funny how 50mm fast lenses can have such dramatically different characters. I go back and forth among the Zuiko, the Hexanon and the Fujinon, love all three, but I always come back to the Zuiko as the one that does everything right. I have a 24/2.8 MC and it may be one of the sharpest lenses that I have ever used – Zeiss/Leica territory. I’m working up a little piece on it for the near future. I’ve never used the 85/2 but have heard great things about it – do you have some images online? The 18/3.5 is exceptional, albeit not an easy lens. At least mine has some greenish tinting towards the edges, depends on lighting and it usually can be corrected in post, but it is there. Neither the 21 nor the 24 do it. But I have read that it is sharper than the 18mm Contax – I have no personal experience with the latter but the Zuiko is one sharp lens.
      Take care!!

      Alberto

  4. Jack Jack

    Thanks so much for this. I actually came on here to look at your opinion of the Hexanons (50mm1.4 vs 57mm f1.4), and noticed this article. My copy of the Olympus 50mm f1.4 (1.1 million+ serial number) arrived a couple of hours ago in mint condition. Have been looking for one for a few weeks now, and this is the only one I have found, so it feels like perfect timing to read your article and enjoy the photos.

  5. Thank you for your visit and glad to hear that I can be of some help. You won’t be disappointed, the Zuiko 50 1.4 is a great lens!!
    All the best,
    Alberto

  6. chris chris

    Well i only just saw you did a review of this lens as well, i decided on the 57mm hexanon vs the 50mm 1.4 after trying both ,i liked the character of the 57mm more,and similarly i sold my zuiko 1.8 after i got the 1.4 simply based on the fact i didn’t think i’d use the 1.8 much .I totally agree with your description of the zuiko 1.4 and your image examples are stellar as usual..thanks for the review.

  7. Hi Chris – nice to hear from you. I suspected you would like the 57mm Hexanon, it is a tough call with the 50mm, but its character is phenomenal. The Zuiko 1.8 is a great lens, and you can get it for little more than shipping costs. But yes, if you also have the 1.4 Zuiko the slower lens will hardly get used.
    Take care!!
    Alberto

  8. Grear review and lovely pictures, thank you, 50f1.4 SN11xxxxx is also my favourite Zuiko lens and I had 50mm f1.2 for a while

    • Thank you Peter. What were your impressions of the 1.2 Zuiko? I’ve never owned one, I love the old Rokkor 58mm f/1.2, and would like to compare it to the Zuiko some day

  9. Joshua Gutierrez Joshua Gutierrez

    Alberto,

    While looking up reviews for the Zuiko 50mm 1.4, I came this site and didn’t realize it was you until I started reading the review. It was words like ” Sweet rendition, balanced, Surgical,” when referring to lenses that I knew it had to be you. lol

    Anyways, lovely photos by the way. I wanted to chime in about my favorite lens – Zuiko 50mm 1.2. I purchased it in absolute pristine condition about a year ago and there’s something special about it. This may sound silly, but whenever I have it attached I get this gut feeling that I can take no bad photos. Shooting into trees or brush causing specular highlights to emerge, it produces beautiful round bokeh balls. I tend to shoot in B/W ( Raw) and i’m instantly taken back to the age of Film-Noir. For landscapes, like the canon 50 1.2 that can produce a “Dreamy” look and feel at 1.2, in addition to my slew of landscape lenses, I’ll take landscape shots at 1.2 ( not ideal) however, it creates the dream-like effect. Here’s what I’ve found: @1.2 – dreamy look / razor sharp if you’re subject is 2-3 meters away/purple fringing. @2 – Razor sharp, dream-like “look” is gone / slight fringing/contrasty/ leica pop @2.8 – surgically sharp, fringing is gone, contrast begins to really appear, less leica pop, vibrant color @ 4 – amazing…

    This is why I love Zuiko lenses as well as vintage lenses. They have a character that cannot be replicated ( they could, but won’t) by modern lenses.

    The exciting thing about all this….I just purchased a 50 1.4, (1,046,000 serial) and very excited to see what kind of personality it has. Everything I’ve read is nothing short of spectacular, however, I wanted to comment on the 1.2 as it’s in a whole league of it’s own. I also have a 24/2 that i’m having repaired and just anxious to begin using.

    • Hello Joshua,

      That was a great summary of the Zuiko 1.2! I’ve never owned one, but it is definitely on my list. The only f/1.2 lens that I own is the Rokkor 58mm and, funny that you would mention this, when I go out with it I get the same feeling that you describe – whatever I do I will get great pictures. Of course, it seldom works out that way, as the very shallow depth of field is very difficult to work with effectively. But when you pull it off it is simply marvelous. I love the Rokkor, I bought it for little money because it had fungus and a stuck aperture, but I learned some time ago that old Minolta lenses are very easy to work on (Zuikos, not so much…), so I got it looking like new in no time. I suspect that I will also like the Zuiko when I get my hands on it. And I think that I can more or less imagine what the differences will be. The Minolta will come out ahead in terms of stunning color and out of focus rendition, the Zuiko in terms of surgical precision. So, I need them both – right?

      I fully agree with your comment that it should be possible to make lenses like these now, but for whatever reason they don’t. You will love the Zuiko 1.4.

      Cheers!!

  10. I am now going to have to dig out my old Zuiko 50mm f/1.4 and see how it fits on my OMD EM10 ii. Yes the 50mm f/1.8 was a beautiful standard kit prime lens, the only one with a plastic aperture ring that felt more solid than most modern lenses. All the others seemed to have a metal ring. The 1.8/50 and 2.8/28 also had this strange shint second ring on the lens mount, no idea why. Zuiko lenses were always my favourites for feel, looks and that wonderful smooth resistance of focussing action. I was lucky to get hold of a new old stock 85mm f/2 which I have tried on the OM2n and the OMD EM10ii with success as well as a 180mm f/2.8 that I hardly ever used and it’s a truly beautiful lens. I love the engineering quality of all of these. Then there is the tiny 21mm f/3.5 and 16mm f/3.5 full frame fisheye. Most got secondhand, I could never have afforded them new. Thanks to Fotodiox adapters they all now have a new lease of life on the OMD EM models.

    • Alaaddin Alaaddin

      Dear Dave,
      I bought a F1.4 50mm last week and looking for a suitable adapter to fit on my EM-10ii. I am bit careful on choosing adapters. On another camera the adapter damaged the electronic contact points. Is the Fotodiox adapter reliable?
      I am anxious to hear about the pics you took on the EM-10ii.
      Thanx.

      • I have never had much luck with Fotodiox adapters, tolerances are lax. K&F Concept adapters have worked better for me. I hope this helps.

  11. Anthony Amenta Anthony Amenta

    Thanks very much for your review…

    I’m convinced I need this lens! 🙂

    All the Best,
    Anthony

  12. Fazal Fazal

    A most beautiful and precise review of the Zuiko 50mm 1. and excellent pictorial and verbal narration of the gentleness of this beautiful lens.
    My copy #1134146, yet to reach me this week, would it be a later MC ?

    Thank You!

    • Thank you! Yes, I believe that is one of the very late MC lenses. You won’t be disappointed!

      • Fazal Fazal

        I am so happy and looking forward to using it on my OM-1, 1n and OM-2n.

  13. I used both the 50mm f1.4 and f1.8, late serial numbers in the 90’s. I found the 1.8 sharper wide open but the 1.4 quickly caught up. My copy of the 1.4 had a very small bubble in it, I’ve heard that quality control on this particular Zuiko isn’t as good as others. I think the 1.8 is the real unsung hero, for the price it’s excellent and compact, which is what the OM system was all about.

  14. bill bill

    Well im in search for a 50mm prime , i was mostly looking between the minolta md III 1.4 (i have allready the md 35-70 and i love it), pentax smc 1.4 (i have the smc k 28 f/3.5 and i love it also), rollei planar 50mm 1.8 or maybe pancolar mc (maybe because im currious to taste a zeiss lens ), but then i found this article and i saw those amazing images , dont know anything about zuiko lenses but those colors and contrast are fantastic . Now im more confused than before .. what would be your suggestion in terms of colors and rendering ?

    • Howdy Bill – that is a tough one! At one time or another I have owned and used all of the lenses that you mention except the Pentax, although I did own a Pentax 1.7 that I loved. They are all great lenses, and you can’t go wrong with ay of them, but here are some pointers.

      The Minolta and the Zuiko are perhaps a bit better in terms of all-around rendition. Both have exceptional resolution, beautiful color and contrast and gorgeous bokeh. The Minolta may be a bit better in terms of handling, and the Zuiko a bit better in terms of build quality, except if it the Minolta is an older Rokkor, which has outstanding build quality.

      The Rollei is an exceptionally sharp lens, sharper than the Minolta and Zuiko, pure Zeiss, but you won’t get as beautiful out of focus backgrounds as with the two faster lenses. It also has a very simple construction which makes it very easy to take apart and clean if you come across an example that is in less than perfect optical condition.

      The Pancolar is optically very similar (identical?) to the Rollei, but build quality is not all that great, and the M42 screw mount can sometimes be a pain.

      I hope this helps!

      • bill bill

        hey alberto .. you really helped me a lot .. nice to hear good things from you about the minolta and since the zuiko above 1.XXX.XXX looks pretty rear to find i think the minolta is the one i should go for . Wish you the best for the new year …

Leave a Reply to Matt Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.