I gotta agree with Lex. The 135/2.8 is an underrated portrait lens. I
won't knock the 100/2 which is a superb piece of glass, but I find the
135/2.8 and 85/2 combination more useful.
Other than portraits, if you want a good length for shooting a wedding
available light from the back of a church, try the 135mm. Just used mine
for two "practice weddings" done with a pro friend. On tripod at the very
back, horizontal, vertical (using the Bogen "L" bracket), with and without
a 4-point star-cross. Turned the star-cross so the apex of flares from all
the candles meet dead center over the couple's head. Looks great (if you
like the star-cross effect).
Based on doing this twice, I plan to have the OM-1n loaded with ISO 400
Portra NC and prepositioned with the tripod at the back just for this. The
OM-4 will be on a flash bracket for the few flash shots I can take just
before it starts and right at the end so I don't have to fumble around
during the service.
My least used piece of gear? The soft case for body, lens and winder!
Actually I use it like a pouch to hold the winder and remote release in the
camera bag. I think I actually put it on a camera with winder attached
once! Found it worse than a never-ready (which I do use).
-- John
At 06:41 10/21/00 , Lex Jenkins wrote:
>I don't have that much OM gear. But whenever I've been struck by that
>feeling of "Why did I buy this?" I almost immediately sell it or swap it for
>something different. (A Canon T50 was like that - an oversized P&S
>disguised as an SLR. Okay, actually I bought it for my mom to use so she
>could borrow my lenses, but she's too nearsighted to focus manually, so now
>she has an iS-2.)
>
>But if I owned a 100mm prime, it would qualify. Tried 'em, used 'em
>regularly at work, never felt compelled to own one. I prefer the little bit
>of extra magnification and/or subject distance the 135mm allows. I'll bet
>we could drag out a mighty debate over the "perfect portrait lens" dead
>horse.
>
>I also suspect that if I owned a 500mm or longer telephoto it would soon
>qualify after the novelty wore off. There's no substitute for getting
>closer, and I note most top nature photographers manage with teles shorter
>than 500mm.
>
>And I keep thinking a 1-10 grid screen would be useful. Then I wonder why.
>
>Lessee, what else? Oh, yeh...complicated flash gear. I guess I'm just too
>thickskulled to understand much more than a clip-on flash. Ever since I
>figured out the walk-back-zoom-in method of fill flash, I'm not sure I even
>want to understand TTL flash.
>-----------
>Lex Jenkins
< 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 >
|