the Viv S1 2.8-4 looks nice and it is not too much costly (rated 3.5 at
photodo, the same as AF-Nikkor D). It is probably as hefty as 85, 100 2.8
and 135 3.5 together, but less than a true 2.8-2.8 I guess.
marco
----------
>Da: "Chung, Stephen" <ChungS1@xxxxxxx>
>A: "'olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx'" <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Oggetto: [OM] RE: oly-digest V2 #877 - 85/f2.0 vs 100/f2.8
>Data: Mer, 28 apr 1999 8:31
>
> On paper, the 15mm extra reach of the 100 would seem to be not that
> significant, and yet I have found situations where the choice was clear
> between using 85mm and 100mm focal length. 85mm in the case of the full
> length portrait in confined spaces. 100mm in the case were I wanted a touch
> tighter framing of animals at the Zoo where barriers prevent one from moving
> closer. Every so often I entertain thoughts of adding a quality 70ish to
> 210ish F2.8 zoom to the cupboard, however with the associated size, weight,
> cost and lack of choice in OM mount, it has yet to happen.
< 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 >
|