From past discussion and experiance the 200 f/4 would
probably not be a good lens for this type of work since
it's not at it's best at wide-open aperture. For piggyback
astrophoto I would say no to the 200f/4...Although I do
recall the 65-200 being rated favorably. I would say it
would be the better choice.
On Thu, 8 Aug 2002 12:47:18 -0700
"Aaron Ginn" <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I'm looking at buying a 200mm for my OM-1n for astrowork.
I had my eye on
the 200mm f/4 since it apparently performs well with a 2X
teleconverter
attached to it. According to Gary's test page, however,
the 65-200mm f/4
zoom seems to perform as well as the prime at the long
end. Now I'm
wondering if I shouldn't consider it since I would love a
nice telephoto
zoom for my Oly.
Now please don't say buy both! It's entirely out of the
question right now.
I'd consider adding the zoom later for general purpose
work, but if it will
perform as well piggybacked on a scope, I'll forego the
prime. Also, what
kind of results could I expect with a 2X converter at
200mm?
Thanks a lot,
Aaron Ginn
< 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 >
< 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 >
|