> >Low: OM1N, 28/2.8, 50/3.5, 100/2.8.
> >
> >High: OM4Ti, 24/2, 35-80/2.8, 135/2.8 Oops, no macro, but a
> little wider
> >range.
I started out with an OM-2S, 35/2.8 and 100/2.8. I bought and
sold a lot of equipment through the years, but these two lenses
remain my favorites and most used lenses. I'd still consider
these two as the preferred "low kit" in my book.
I disagree when it comes to buying low and swapping out as time
and money allows. I'd much rather have a 50/3.5 in my bag than
the hope of getting a 50/2 next year. I can always swap when
funds allow, but I can't get the picture if I don't have the
equipment.
Who knows, you just may not like F2 lenses! One grows very
attached to the smaller, lighter models. I carry a pretty small
bag, but stuffed in it are two bodies, a flash, filters,
extension tubes and 24/2.8, 35/2.8, 50/3.5, 100/2.8, 135/3.5 and
200/4 lenses. A 90/2 would take the place of at least two
lenses or a body or the flash.
I know, some people think my kit is pretty pathetic. Low Rent
District. Especially since I'm using pretty ancient lenses (all
are silvernosed, SC jobbies). All have seen better days (glass
is clean, though) and the OM-2S is looking more metallic. But,
they are paid for, and still earn me a fair bit of side income.
Don't be afraid of "Low-end" kits. Go for a handful of
dirt-cheap lenses in multiples of focal lengths and fill the
gaps later. 28mm lenses (or 35mm) make good first-time
wide-angles. A 50mm lens is usually pretty cheap and will be a
money making lens, but typically doesn't inspire creative
photography too much. A 100mm is an excellent telephoto for the
beginner, but you may never outgrow it.
AG-Schnozz
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
http://health.yahoo.com
< 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 >
|