Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] 100/2 vs 90/2

Subject: Re: [OM] 100/2 vs 90/2
From: Robinsnes@xxxxxxx
Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 20:34:58 EDT
This seems to me to be a very personal situation. I do own an om100 2.8, an 
85 2 and a 135 2.8. In Leica, I have several 90mm M lenses. Also have an OM 
75-150. Most of the time, I shoot a Blad 150, which is approximately an 85. 
I had a recent request to do a portrait in 35mm in my studio. I chose the 
75-150 so that I could avoid constantly shifting my tripod. The images were 
done from f8-f11 on Portra 160NC. 
When they returned from my lab (professional), I was shocked. If I had not 
known that they were done with the om at approx. 90mm, I would have thought 
they came out of the 150 sonnar. I have since had experiences with just the 
prime lenses, which I do prefer, and find them all to be very sharp. At the 
risk of raising some flames, I must say my eyes are old and tired. I do not 
see any real difference in similar situation done with the M summicron and 
the OM lenses. I am sure than some close bench analysis would possible tell 
us something, on the other hand...they all have sold very well.
IMHO, stop trying to pick the perfect lens, it doesn't exist. Get to know 
what you have...shoot...shoot...shoot. The lens you will prefer, is the lens 
that is nearest and hand.
When I was a young photographer...many years ago, I thought there was magic 
to the lens I was using. Now I know...the magic is me and how I use it to 
see. I choose the longer focal lengths for more compression...the shorter for 
less.
Now what do the other pros and experienced amateurs have to say?
Roger

Roger Skully
robinsnestphotography.com
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz