On Fri, 8 Jun 2001, skipwilliams@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> OK, I'm contemplating an 85/2, but I already have a 90/2 and the
> 100/2.8. I know the 85/2 is lighter (by far) than the 90/2, but I'm
> looking for opinions. Is it worth the $150-200 for such a lens? How is
> the performance wide-open?
>
> Skip
>
Skip,
What you should do is, of course, buy the 85/2. I will then, as the kind
soul I am, take the 90/2 off your hands for $150-200 such that you will
break even on the lenses ;)
No, seriously...I use the 85/2 all the time. Often wide open (hey - I
use PanF 50 asa b/w and Kodachrome 25 for colors). While it is a little
better stopped down a step, it's doing fine at f2, and it's possible to
hand-hold it at 1/30. All in all making it a great lens.
Compared to the 100/2.8, I much prefer the 85/2. It seems that the 85 at
2.0 is a bit better (in terms "sharper" and "contrasty") than the 100
at 2.8.
So yeah, I would go for a 85/2 - possibly part with the 100/2.8, if not
to spend too much cash. I hardly ever use my 100/2.8 when the 85/2 is
within reach.
--
Mange hilsner / Sincerely
-------------------------------------------
Thomas Heide Clausen
Civilingeniør i Datateknik (cand.polyt)
M.Sc in Computer Engineering
E-Mail: T.Clausen@xxxxxxxxxxxx
WWW: http://www.cs.auc.dk/~voop
-------------------------------------------
< 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 >
|