Or you could get a Tamron 80-200/2.8. It's actually sharper than
either the 100/2.8 or the 85/2, and you can zoom it to either
focal length, or anywhere in between, or shorter, or longer.
Oh, and by the way, it has a nine-blade diaphragm. Must be
another bokeh thing. :-)
Happy holidays.
Walt
---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: Andrew Gullen <andrew.gullen@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 13:52:06 -0500
>Christian -
>
>My two cents worth: my 100/2.8 is amazingly sharp, with
beautiful contrast
>and clarity. I haven't tried the 85/2, but it's hard for me to
believe it
>could be better.
> - The 85/2 has the advantage of 8 blades vs 6 for the 100/2.8,
> so it will do soft backgrounds better.
> - The 100/2.8 will have slightly flatter perspective, which is
often
> more flattering (esp. if the subject has a big nose).
>
>Regards,
>Andrew Gullen
>
>> Re: [OM] Portrait lens
>> I think I will wait to "catch" a 85/2 following your advices.
>
>
>< 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 >
|