At 09:49 AM 9/19/1998 -0600, Garth you wrote:
huge snip
>
>As for the 50s, the 1.4 is a wonderful low-light lens (in fact, I'm
looking for a 1.2), but the 1.8 seems to produce sharper images to my eye,
even when both are stopped down. I hope someday to test out the 50/2.0
macro, which I've heard puts all the other 50s to shame (even the 3.5
macro) in terms of resolution.
>
Oh no, Garth! What have you done! The 50mm saga returneth ... ;-)
little snip
>
>Others on this mailing list have weighed in with opinions about the 200mm
(mostly trashing the lens, although I seem to remember at least one person
saying it was a fab lens). I think it's fabulous, certainly, and have
captured some very nice hand-held images with it. I'd like to try it with
a high-quality teleconverter someday.
>
I was concerned about the comments too. Mine is SC. I assumed I'd have a
lot of flare a couple weeks ago when I was shooting sunsets down on the
river. It certainly flared a lot in the viewfinder! But the
transparencies were terrific. It's a thoroughbred Zuiko alright.
Joel
< 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 >
|