At 01:49 1/6/02, Jim Brokaw wrote:
Scott -- Consider the 85/2.0 for portrait work... its a good focal length. I
think 135 compresses the face too much ('flattens' the perspective). The 85
is probably less expensive than a 100/2.0, though more than the 100/2.8, but
it is a small, handy lens with the speed to be useful in a lot of
situations.
--
Jim Brokaw
OM-1's, -2's, -4's, (no -3's yet) and no OM-oney...
Just used the 85/2 Wednesday evening at a friend's studio. Used it to
photograph the friend's 18 mo. old son sniffing a giant indoor potted
amarylis lily in full blossom, then put the 14mm extension tube on it and
photographed the blossoms. It was an *excellent* length for working in his
studio. Used a 150mm f/4 Sekor on the M645 about a week before and it was
almost too long (perspective equiv. to about a 95mm in 35mm format). After
working with the 85/2 Zuiko in his studio I'm thinking now about getting
the 110mm f/2.8 Sekor for a slightly shorter length!
-- John
< 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 >
|