George wrote:
>> DT> Wall Street Camera had a used RTSIII that I really loved. Since
>> DT> I also bought a 35 1.4 and a 85 1.4 I got a pretty good deal.
>
>I'm not taking sides here, but I sure wish there were 35 F/1.4 and 85
>F/1.4 lenses available by Zuiko! Sorta belies your statement above re
>Zuiko having better 'depth' than Contax lens selection. <g>
Ok, you caught me here. However, I'm not sure that the absence of a
85/f1.4 or a 135/f2 from the Zuiko roster wasn't intentional. For
instance, Pentax had both an SMC-A 85/f1.4 as well as a 135/f1.8 --
both with ED glass, which were far from pettite (the 85mm was approx.
1.3 lbs and 67mm filter, whereas the 135mm was 2 lbs and 77mm filter).
Either lens mounted on the Pentax Super Program body (size similar to
OM bodies) completely overwhelms it. (Note that these focal lengths
are meant to be shot handheld).
OTOH, 35/f1.4, 28/f1.4, and/or 24/f1.4 would be nice.
John Prosper wrote:
>[85/f1.4 and 35/f1.4] were part of a wish list I emailed to
>Olympus about two and a half months ago. In view of the
>upcoming price increase, I probably wasted my time.
About the best you can do here is: Vivitar Series 1 28/f1.9 and
135/f2.3 -- both are very sharp at all apertures, as well as the
Soligor 85/f1.7 which is a bit soft wide-open, but works well as
a portrait lens.
Cheers,
/Gary Schloss.
Studio City, CA
schloss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|