Robert Garrett wrote:
> Here are some of the things I've been considering: Zuiko 21 f3.5, 24
> f2 or f2.8 (or maybe not so wide w/ the 28 f2/2.8)
> 50 f3.5macro,
Definitly a sharp lens
> 100 f2 or 100 f2.8,
Both are sharp lenses, the 2,0 is fast, can focus down to 70cm, heavy,
expensive.
The 2,8 is fast enough, small as a 50mm lens, light weight, inexpensive
> or 135 f3.5, Sigma macro 90 f2.8. I've not seen most of these
> lenses so I'm not sure of relative size (or, cost).
There are not many "dogs" (I dont know one) if you stay with the non
zoom Zuiko lenses.
Richard
##################################################################
# This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List
# To receive the Olympus Digest send mail to: listserv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
# with subscribe olympus-digest in the message body.
#
# To unsubscribe from the current list send a message to
# listserv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx with unsubscribe olympus in the message body.
#
# For questions email: owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
##################################################################
|