My first 135, back in the early 80s was a Beroflex 2.8. It was
beautifully clear and contrasty, with good telephoto "effect"
(compression). It took ages before I found the same quality, in a
Zuiko 135/2.8 (thanks Giles). The 135/3.5 is nice and small, but
mine (which may be a little hazy admittedly) does not give me the
same picture-taking pleasure. The 135/2.8 is not significantly
bigger ... subjective, non-scientific judgement ;-).
Chris
Is there anyone who would like to give their opinion about the virtues
of the 135/2.8 over the 3.5? my disease is worsening, and I now believe
that one is soon destined for my camera case....
--
___________
???>-}
C M I Barker
Gamlingay, Cambridgeshire, Great Britain
mailto:imagopus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
mailto:chris_barker@xxxxxxxxx
YaC tel: +44 (0)7092 251126
< 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 >
|