At 05:43 PM 8/1/1999 -0600, you wrote:
>So may I please talk about Zuikos now? <gg>
>
>I'm interested in getting a 35-70 zoom; I'm sure you all have covered
>this ground before and might not want to again, but, if anyone wouldn't
>mind taking the time, I'd love to hear of peoples' impressions,
>experiences, and favorites among the various options. Thanks!
>
>--Mike
>
>
Mike,
As you surmise, we used to have rather free form discussions of the various
50's and 35-70's. Gary's work has now set standards of resolution and
contrast, and if I had to summarize what Gary has shown it is that you tend
to get what you pay for. So the 35-80/2.8 is the way to go, followed by
the 35-70/3.6, if you must have the absolute best resolution and contrast.
I accept this on faith, never having laid hands on either lens.
There are other criteria to consider, however. I still like the
35-70/3.5-4.5 because it is very light. It is a lens I continue to use even
though I have a 35-105/3.5-4.5 because it is easy to work with and not hard
to carry. I've gotten handheld shots even at f5.6 which are acceptably
sharp. It helps to have a bright viewfinder (2 series screen, etc.). I was
quite struck by Hank Hogan's macro work with this lens and a reversing ring
on the OM gallery.
I have to admit that I prefer its performance between 35 and 50mm.
Joel Wilcox
Iowa City, Iowa USA
< 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 >
|