Yes, with the 90/2 alone the quality may be similar to 135/4.5 but 135/4.5 has
longer
working distance. If you add tube to the 90/2 to get higher magnification, I
think
the 80/4 with 65-116 will give better result.
C.H.Ling
Giles wrote:
>
> You could also consider the Zuiko 90mm f2 macro and 65-116 auto extension
> tube. I think this would be a more versatile combination as the 90mm
> could in most circumstances be used without the 65-116 while the 135 can
> not. Also, this combination would be easier to focus and have performance
> that should at least equal that of the 135mm f4.5 macro.
>
> I agree about things of high quality.
>
> Giles
>
> tatu_laitinen@xxxxxxx wrote:
>
> > A better idea is to get both 80mm f4 and 135mm f4.5 macros on 65-116
> > extension. They are a bit more slower to use
> > than 90mm macros, but the results are simply fantastic! If you are really
> > serious about close-up/macro photography
>
> > In a longer run its much wiser to invest on higher quality (more expensive)
> > equipment than to buy cheap products
> > that will not last for long.
> >
< 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 >
|