Just got back from 4 days in Charlottetown attending the CUSO AGM.
Besides getting an incredible introduction to CUSO and having the
opportunity to meet some of the people I'll be working with in Lao I've
also picked up an invitation to visit Fiji on my way back to Canada and
possibly Vanuatu as well.
On Jun 17, 2004, at 4:53 PM, Moose wrote:
> I'm an auto knd of guy for day to day stuff. I'd probably have my old
> standby 2N CLAed for the trip. Then I would likely take an OMPC (or
> even an OM-20/G. Why? To take places where I wouldn't want to lose or
> damage the good stuff. I'd also take a recently CLAed 1(n) carefully
> sealed up with silica gel and hope to never have to open it as
> ultimate back-up. As someone else has mentioned, I'd take a pocketable
> camera too. If batteries are available, probably something like an
> Epic. Otherwise or anyway, an XA.
I still have a preference for 1N's for a few reasons. Firstly, my OM-2s
is my only auto body and is currently out of commission (possibly for
good if the circuit is dead). Secondly, I just prefer the feel of the
1N's anyways. Thirdly, I think that all mechanical bodies might be a
bit less vulnerable to humidity than one with electronic circuitry to
get fouled up. Of course the recommendation to take plenty silica gel
is a definite must in any case.
In terms of having something automatic, I think the pocket-able P&S
achieves that goal better in this case. It allows me to have good
"serious" bodies to work with that I like to use yet still have a
"casual" body to carry with me almost all the time that I can also
easily hand to someone else to snap a picture of me as needed.
> The gap from 21 to 35 is huge to me. I'd prefer a 28mm with the 21mm.
I've been thinking about this as well. I have 3 wides in total in the
20's, 21/3.5, 24/2.8 and 28/2.8. I think 28mm is too close to 35mm
personally but tend to agree that 21mm might be too much of a gap and
is getting into a more specialised range. I'm thinking that the 24/2.8
may be the best choice.
> Good choice for speed and size/weight. Works really well with the Viv
> 2x Macro as a 100/2.8 to 1:1. I'd also take a 35-70/3.5-4.5 to go with
> the cheap auto body
Yes I think this is almost a definite on the trip, even if I take the
85/2 as well. The extra stop of speed could prove very useful at times.
As for zoom, I agree that it may be useful to have some type of zoom
available. Currently, I don't own any zooms for my OM's as I moved to
the OM system to get away from them. I'm thinking the best way to
achieve this is with the aforementioned P&S body as it really fits in
well with the more "casual" nature that you mention elsewhere. There
are times when I will want to get some shots and won't have the
opportunity to play with lenses but I think in most of those situations
I'd be reaching for the P&S rather than an SLR with a zoom.
>> 135/3.5
>>
> A little slow with the 2x. The 100/2.8 or 135/2.8 would be a better
> match for the telextender. The 85/2 would get you 170/4
Yes I'm thinking that the 135 will be dropped. If I take the 85/2 then
I can get the 170/4 you mention with the 2x converter which isn't much
slower and gives me a little more reach. I'm feeling that if I want
something longer that the 200/4 may be the way to go. Although it's
pretty close to the 170/4 option with the 2x it does give even more
reach and also gives me the options of a 400/8 if circumstances require
even more reach.
So here's the updated kit as it stands:
2 OM-1N's
1 P&S body with zoom lens (model undetermined at this point)
24/2.8
35/2
50/1.4
85/2
200/4
Viv 2x macro converter
If I really had to get it down to 4 lenses I'd drop either the 50/1.4
or the 85/2. I can see good arguments for keeping or dropping either
though so it's a tough call.
Andrew "Frugal" Dacey
frugal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.tildefrugal.net/
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|