I have small hands and nevertheless have some difficulty quickly and easily
adjusting the aperture rings on the f2.8 series of wide angle lenses. The
50mm and greater focal length lenses are easier to adjust simply because
there is significantly more barrel length beyond the aperture ring. In
addition to the extra light the f2.0 series of wide angle lenses pass, their
additional size makes them attractive to me. Given this, the 40mm f2.0,
although cute, does not appeal to me for actual use, although I certainly
would like to find one at a bargain price as a trophy lens.
----Original Message Follows----
Let's see, compared to the 50/1.8 the 40/2 is 7mm shorter in length.
The 40/2 focuses to 0.3m, compared to 0.23m for the 50/3.5 macro, not
too shabby. I have noticed that the lens hood for the 40/2 also goes on
the 85/2 and 100/2.8. what's the difference between the hood that says
85/2 100/2.8 and the one that says 40/2 85/2 100/2.8. I assume they
are interchangeable?
/wayne
At 09:02 PM 9/28/2000 -0500, Franklin A. Berryman wrote:
>I know this is probably heresy, but does anyone think the 40mm is
>simply to small?
< 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 >
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.
< 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 >
|