At 06:57 6/7/01, Erwin Voogt wrote (in part):
Hi,
Marcin Kost wrote:
Now I want to buy a 135 mm lens, but I am not sure which one I should
choose ( 2.8 or 3.5 the price in Poland is almost the same). Maybe you
can help me. Maybe you know any web site with technical data of these
lenses.
Welcome to the list!
As Henrik Dahl already wrote it depends on what you want to do with the
135. The 49 mm filter of the 3.5 is a big advantage since your other
lenses have the same filter thread. So you only have to buy only one
polarizer. Furthermore the 3.5 is very small, a real "stealth" lens. The
2.8 is not very large either. If the extra 0.5 stop is important for you,
buy the 2.8, otherwise the 3.5 will be fine and easier to use.
Gary's test suggests the 3.5 is not very good wide open. This is not my
experience.
And now for the opposing viewpoint:
OK, not really an opposing one, just an alternate.
I have a multi-coated 135mm f/2.8 and wouldn't trade or sell it. Performs
very well, even wide open. Yes, it's a little heavier and larger with a
55mm filter ring, but still smaller and lighter than other OEM lenses in
this length/speed, and it can easily be hand held. However, since my
Zuiko's are the faster lenses and most of them have a 55mm filter ring this
is not a problem. Note that f/3.5 is actually 2/3 stop slower than f/2.8
(therefore 1/3 stop faster than f/4). The biggest advantage for me is the
brighter viewfinder with easier focusing in lower light levels, and this is
one of the lenses I periodically use wide open. I suggest you think about
which you prefer most: the brighter viewfinder and speed, or the smaller
size and weight with 49mm filter ring.
-- John
< 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 >
|