Mike,
I can't share any 38/2.8 experiences. One passed through my hands, but I
didn't use it enough. I thought, however, that another fine lens to
consider is the 90/2 Macro. My single favorite lens.
Check out some of the flower shots at www.scales.tzo.com/35mm.htm All taken
with the 90/2.
Tom
> I'm an amatuer hobbiest interested in blowing things up: errr... making
> closeups of bugs and flowers. I've progressed from screw-in closeup
> diopters to generic ext. tubes to a dedicated OM 50/3.5 macro. I really
> like the 50/3.5, BTW. Now I've got an opportunity to get either a 38/2.8
> macro or possibly a 135/4.5 macro. Apparently either would require an
> additional purchase of either Auto Bellows or Telescopic Auto Tube.(Am I
> right that each would require tubes or bellows?) From reading between the
> lines in a 1984 ed. "The OM System Lens Handbook", it might appear to me
> that the 38/2.8 macro with 65-116 Tele Auto Tube is a pretty good
> combination for handheld nature closeups. However, I'm leary of spending
> that much money and having to get that close, only to find out something
> that makes me regret what (for me) would be a substantial cash outlay.
> Getting lens touching close to some insects and plants is a cause of
> concern, but for a variety of future projects larger-than-life
> representations would be an asset.
>
> To recap: my interest is strictly non-specific and amatuer in nature; (ie:
> no specific requirements,... yet). Money _is_ an issue. Convience and
> actual useability and flexibilty are other issues. I probably won't get
> much use out of anything that's too much hassle to set-up and carry in a
> waist case and mount/shoot off a very conventional light Bogen or Tiltall
> tripod.
>
> Anybody out there with various macro experience care to comment? I'm open
> to comments on lenses, tubes, bellows, film, lighting, tricks, etc. Has
> anybody bought either the 38/2.8 or 135/4.5 or bellows or auto tubes and
> regretted it?
> Or has purchasing these items meant complete financial freedom, endless
> party invitations and objects of sexual desire wantonly throwing
themselves
> into the purchasers path? <g>
>
> Thanks very much,
> Mike Swaim
>
< 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 >
|