Greg,
Thank you for the info., maybe I need to look out for the 100/3.5 instead.
Jim
Jim,
Herbert Keppler devoted his July 1996 SLR column in Pop Photo to a comparison
of the Vivitar Series 1 105/2.5 Macro and the much less expensive Vivitar
100/3.5 Macro. He reported that the 100/3.5 actually outperformed the 105/2.5
at 1:1 and 1:2, center and corner. The 100/3.5 goes to 1:2 unaided and uses a
special matched achromatic close-up lens to reach 1:1. The close-up lens
reduces effective focal length to 75 mm at 1:1, but working distance is only 8
mm less than with the 105/2.5 due to the longer helical extension of the
105/2.5 (140 mm vs. 132 mm working distance).
Physical stats: the 105/2.5 is 100 mm long, weighs 650 g, and uses 52 mm
filters; the 100/3.5 is 65.5 mm long, weighs 270 g, and uses 49 mm filters,
the OM standard. Seems like the 100/3.5 fits the Olympus "smaller and lighter"
philosophy!
I have never handled either of these lenses, but the article caught my
attention and made it into my tear-sheet file.
Hope this helps.
Greg
< 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 >
< 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 >
|