Shawn Wright wrote:
>
> 'm planning on getting a 50mm macro lens for light weight backpacking,
> however I'm a bit confused as to what's on offer
>
> Can somebody explain the difference between the the f2 and f3.5 versions.
> (and don't say f1.5!)
>
> Is one better quality than the other?
> Is there a difference on image magnification?
> What the closest focus?
>
> Any personal experiences greatly received.
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> Regards,
>
>
The 3.5 is quite a bit lighter. They both go to 1:2 without tubes. I
would not be surprised if the performance was comparable, with perhaps
an edge to the F/2. The faster lens would be much better for low light
photos (which I've noticed you're doing lately) and my recent tests show
the 50/2 macro to be super sharp wide open.
Hope this helps.
--
george :>)
< 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 >
|