>> The other difference that I failed to mention in my original reply to
>> Dan is that the 85-250 is a two touch lens and the 65-200 is a one
>> touch. I greatly prefer the one touch design. I find it far more usefull
>> when dealing with fast moving objects. It allows the focus and framing
>> to be adjusted without any shift of grip on the lens.
>>
>
>Yes, I agree the one touch design works much faster, but the resolution and
>sharpness of the 85-250 is great even at close focus.
It's a matter of preference, isn't it? I do a lot of pre-focus shooting. I
find zooming a one-touch is kind of like using a varifocal lens -- I want
the focus to stay the same when I zoom, dammit! :-)
For ultimate sharpness at large aperatures on non-moving objects, I zoom
all the way in, focus, then back off the zoom for composition. On a
one-touch, this simply doesn't work -- you have to fine-tune the focus each
time you zoom.
The zoom rings on OM two-touch lenses are consistently, conveniently
located, and I have little trouble moving back and forth between the two
very quickly.
There has also been mention of one-touch lenses getting loose and changing
zoom when you point them up or down.
Of course, when all you have is a hammer, all the world's a nail. I
recently acquired a Zuiko 35-105 one-touch, and I'm trying real hard to
like it. I think one-touch is a bit more useful for wide-angle zooms than
for telephotos, because you're more likely to be shooting deep moving
things, vs flat moving things as a likely subject for telephoto.
: Jan Steinman <mailto:jans@xxxxxxxxxxx>
: 19280 Rydman Court, West Linn, OR 97068-1331 USA
: +1.503.635.3229
< 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 >
|