John Peterson wrote:
I hadn't thought about teleconverters, don't think I
will use anything longer than a 135mm, maybe a 200mm.
The Vivitar Macro Teleconverter is special for a light kit because it
makes a 50/1.4/1.8 into a 100/2.8/3.6 macro lens that focuses down to
1:1 and pinch hits with extra reach from longer lenses when needed. Of
course, I like long lenses and close-ups.
Are all silvernose-lenses bad performers (relatively speaking)?
No, certainly not! Some list members have reported superior resolution
from particular SCs compared to their MC brothers. The MCs generally
have higher contrast and better flare resistance but not so you would
notice in most picture taking situations. And an SC lens used with the
hood by a knowledgeable photographer will likely give better results in
many cases in those categories than an MC used without a hood and
without consideration for the lighting situation in how the picture is
taken. Among the lenses you have mentioned, the 85/2 and 100/2.8 (and
maybe the 24/2.8?) have strong advocates on the list for the SC versions.
The only problems I was pointing out are with the earliest versions of
the high volume 50mm lenses. It's not even that they are bad lenses in
the broad sense, just that they aren't up to the high standard of other
Zuikos.
Thanks again for the long and thoughtful reply.
You are very welcome, Sometimes thinking out the answer to someone
else's questions clarifys my thinking about my own stuff.
Moose
< 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 >
|