I agree with you, Chris.
Outdoor Photographer had an article, bottom line, don't replace equipment just
because you want the latest/greatest, master what you already own. I have 2 OM
bodies, Zuiko lenses, just bought 2 more Zuikos off ebay. Thinking I was doing
myself a favor in 1999, I bought a 28-200 Tamron zoom to take to Ireland and
reduce my load to one camera body, one lens. Disappointments include, no depth
of field feature on the Tamron. That feature resides on Zuiko lenses. In
taking a shot straight down, wide angle, gravity takes the lens all the way
out to its full 200 mm zoom. You have to hold the lens up with your fingers.
Talk about camera shake!
In summary, I'm back to 2 bodies; one with a 28-48 Zuiko; one with a Zuiko
65-200 Telephoto Close up/extension tubes for super close stuff. Both ride
beautifully without notice, one on each hip. I have a 75-150 and,of course a
50 when weight is not a problem. Sharpness could be photographer expertise
which I'm still working on! As you point out, Chris, I learned to live with a
DOS only computer way after Windows hit the scene. I'm a much better computer
analyst (which was my profession) because of it. You really know your stuff
when you shoot OMs armed with Zuikos!
Marilyn
2 cents worth in California!
Chris O'Neill wrote:
> On 28 Oct 2001, at 1:18, Olympus wrote:
>
> > There is no new improvements on the Zuiko lenses, and so I'm scared that
> > the quality of the new lenses from the likes of Nikon etc.. will all but
> > force me to move there... Yuck, I hate Nikon... But the lenses are
> > sharp.
> >
> > Anybody else feel the same way? As much as I love my Zuiko's, I have to
> > think that 20 years of lens technology is going to beat out the Zuiko's I
> > have..
>
> If you absolutely *must* have the "latest and greatest" in optics, then I
> suppose 20 year old Zuiko glass ain't gonna cut it. Personally, I tend to
> look at it the same way I look at my computer equipment... no, it ain't
> the newest and fanciest, but it sure does work good and it meets my
> needs just fine and dandy.
>
> My bet (and I'm sure a dozen folks here will prove me wrong), is that
> you can't tell the difference between a 20 year old Zuiko (in good shape,
> of course) and a brand spaking new whatever unless you're enlarging
> your images to poster-size.
>
> Just my humble opinion, of course. YMMV.
>
> Regards,
>
> Chris
>
> -------------------------------------------------
> Chris O'Neill (chris@xxxxxxxxx)
> Joinco Enterprises Inc., Edmonton, AB Canada
> Web: http://www.joinco.ca
>
> < 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 >
|