From: T.Clausen@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [OM] 100/2.8 vs 100/2 vs 135/2.8
On Fri, 4 Jan 2002 bhinderks@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
At 06:09 PM 1/4/02 -0800, Scott G. wrote:
>Well, as usual, I'm on the horns of a dilemma. I've been thinking of d=
oing
>some "portrait" work. Nothing fancy, and certainly nothing professiona=
l.
>Just some better shots of family.
>
=20
Scott,
=20
Just to be a little different, give some thought to the 85/2. I've used=
the
100/2.8 and the 135 and like them both as well, however, for my style o=
f
shooting family shots the 85 seems to come to hand the most. I tend to =
work
in tight and if you are shooting family you already have a "closer"
relationship than 3rd party type portrait shots. Second choice would be=
my
ever faithful 100/2.8 silvernose -- marvelous lens too.
=20
Barry H
I'd second Barry and point you towards the 85/2. While I have the 100mm
zuik's (prefering the 2.8, btw, other than the fact that it's amazingly
light and compact it's also really sharp), I very often go for the
85/2. In my not-so-humble opinion the perspective of that suits my
photo-style better - and I percieve it as a very sharp lens too. It has
the size of the 100/2.8 and the apeture of the 100/2.0 (and almost the
focal length too).
--=20
-------------------------------------------
Thomas Heide Clausen
Civilingeni=F8r i Datateknik (cand.polyt)
M.Sc in Computer Engineering
E-Mail: T.Clausen@xxxxxxxxxxxx
WWW: http://www.cs.auc.dk/~voop
-------------------------------------------
< 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 >
|