I sold my f4 and picked up an f5. I did not notice any appreciable difference
between the two lenses as far as optical quality goes (YMMV I don't always use a
tripod with this lens.) The advantages for me is that the f5 is smaller and more
compact and most importantly takes 49 mm filters. My primary use for this lens
is backpacking, cycling, and climbing. It means I can reduce the number of
filters I take with me. I also find the f5 a little easier to handhold, which is
important when climbing as I do not usually take a tripod with me.
Jim Couch
"Daniel J. Mitchell" wrote:
> Both of these are available locally. (for a bit more than skipwilliams's
> averages say they should be costing, but once I add in shipping + duty it
> seems more reasonable) and I'm tempted by a decent prime at that length.
>
> Do people have preferences for one over the other? Checking on e-sif,
> unsurprisingly the tradeoff is between weight/size and rather less than a
> stop (I think) of speed -- if anyone has both, which do you find you use
> more? Gary Reese's tests suggest that the f4 performs noticeably better than
> the f5, interestingly.
>
> thanks,
>
> -- dan
< 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 >
|