Skip pretty well covered it, so there's not much I can add. I
will say it's somewhat awkward using this lens with a bare OM
body, which results in having about twice as much lens as camera.
I'm a motor drive junkie, and on an OM-4/MD2 combination, it makes
a well balanced and not too burdensome package. It's also not bad
with a winder.
It has become my lens of choice if I'm grabbing up only one camera
and one lens for some purpose. For instance, on a recent camping
trip with grandkids in the woods, it was the lens I used probably
75 percent of the time because of its speed and range, which made
it easier to get properly framed shots of the hyper little buggers.
It is quite sharp and I would judge its overall performance as
being all but equal to that of my 35-80/2.8 Zuiko.
Walt
---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: Skip Williams <om@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 01:47:22 -0500
>I had this lens for about a year before I traded it for a 35-
80/2.8 + cash. It makes great pictures, but it's quite a big,
honking lens. 82mm filter! The zoom range was always a plus,
especially the 28. It has a unusally small focusing ring, as it's
primarily an AF lens. It also grows a LOT (~3x) when zoomed out,
which makes it quite large at 105mm, especially with the tulip
hood. In general, I found that it was too large to balance well
with the svelte OM bodies. As with many newer lenses, it also
felt very plasticy. At the indoor functions where it excelled, it
tended to overwhelm my subjects; I got a lot of "Wow, look at that
lens." comments, which isn't what I wanted. My Leica M's or an OM
with a small prime are much better at stealthy photos.
>
>Skip
< 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 >
|