This is a 'personal opinion' question, for sure. A lot of it comes down to
$$$$. I have opinions mainly because I own them all.
The 50/3.5 is one of the best bargains in macro lenses. $150 or so is quite
possible, with patience, sometimes less. The disadvantages are the speed of
the lens and when used wide open the bokeh can be a little harsh. A very
sharp lens and certainly the right 'first' macro, to see how much you'd use
it. You can always sell it and get your money back.
The 90/2 vs. 50/2 is a tougher call. The 50/2 is around $375, while the 90/2
is closer to $600. Still a big price difference. The 50 is smaller and
lighter, although heavier than the 50/3.5. The 90/2 has a nicer working
distance, for me. Both incredible lenses, no question.
Of the three, the 90/2 gets the most use, by far. Why? Boken. Smooth,
buttery bokeh. I just love the darn lens.
Tom
> I'm tempted by the Zuiko macro lenses, specifically the 50/2 and 90/2, and
to a lesser extent by the 50/3.5 (?), etc.
>
> I gather that people feel the 90/2 is the best, followed closely by the
50/2, and then opinion becomes more diffuse.
>
> Anyway, what is the pecking order, and why?
>
> And, what's a good price for used examples of same, as a function of
condition?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Joe Gwinn
< 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 >
|