Good analysis Olaf, I would add one thing that may be of importance in
considering the lenses. The 85 f/2 and the 100 f/2.8 both use 49 mm filters
whereas the 100 f/2 uses a 55 mm filter. To my mind one of the real practical
advantages of the 85 f/2 is that it does use the 49 mm filter which is the same
as a majority of Zuikos.
Olaf Greve wrote:
> Hi Scott,
>
> Some ramblings of mine follow down below. Please notice that this post is
> rather subjective, but it may be of some use to you.
>
SNIP
> IMO, there really is no need to own an 85/2 and a 100/2 and a 100/2.8,
> either of these three should do fine. Things to consider:
> -85/2: Somewhat shorter than 100mm (which you may or may not like), F2.
> -100/2.8: Probably the most inexpensive of the three, lightweight, nice
> focal length, but F2.8.
> -100/2: The best of the three, but also the most expensive and heaviest of
> them, F2 (with really good results at that aperture and at f2.8!), great for
> close-up work.
>
SNIP
> Cheers!
> Olafo
< 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 >
|