At 08:07 7/12/01, Oben Candemir wrote:
I'm sure the 35 and 85 f2's are great lenses but my statement wasn't to
cast any sort of opinion on their merits but to just say that I don't
think they will have a place in my kit. I'm of the doubling school and my
ideal set is the:
24 --- 50 --- 100 --- 200
How a user of primes sets up the sequence from short to long depends
greatly on what the lenses are used for and personal preferences. My
sequence was chosen for the type of shooting I do and how I employ them for
it. Bottom line, as one gains experience with the primes, is to think
about the desired sequence from short to long that fits the vision and style.
Would like to eventually replace the 200/4 with the 180/2.8 on the long
end, and may eventually pick up a 21/2 on the short end (there have been a
couple occasions I would have liked to use that length instead of working
the 18/3.5 and the 24/2 was too long). This is all way down the list below
acquiring two or three more Mamiya Sekkor lenses for the medium format rig.
Now on to making photos... (by the way John your Tulip TOPE entry was one
of my favorites and I was surprised by the equipment you used to realise
the shot!).
Thank You! I had fun doing it even if it took 12 frames to get the image I
wanted (envisioned). Thinking outside the common usage for focal lengths
allows unusual perspectives of things. It's risky; sometimes the result is
downright butt ugly.
BTW, try using your 18mm more (e.g. for a second shot after the 21mm) and
critically looking at the results. Granted, it is a difficult lens to use
because of its very radical perspective. I must deliberately check any
prominent vertical or horizonatal lines very carefully. As with many of
the radical long and short focal lengths, success comes with experience
looking through it and using it.
-- 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 >
|