The 100-200/5 is just dark. The 75-150 is quite nice - a tad soft but good
for portraits. I've tried to sell a 28/3.5 recently (excellent, in case
with genuine hood if anyone interested) but couldn't get a fair price -
it's sharp but I think people pass on it because it's older, SC and darker.
It's often a question of 'horses for courses' - was it on this list that
someone was doing very nice portraits with a $25 Lentar 135mm? But you
wouldn't use for subjects where sharp was important!
AndrewF
>So for example, should I avoid the 100~200 because it is so cheap or is
>it a decent lens but cheap because a lot of them are out there? I
>suspect that this is the case with the 75~150, the 135/3.5 and the
>28/3.5. It seems to me that a dog or two might slip into any line even
>Olympus. Comments?
>
>Mike
>
>< 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 >
< 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 >
|