Walt:
Obviously I am not as completely addicted as others. I realize that
using converters is a practical, if imperfect, solution. Though I have
gone the primes route (essentially for speed as the eyes age and I
oftern travel without flash), I like to carry things other than lenses
(food, water, you know). I don't expect to need the reach beyond
180-200mm often enough to justify something bigger and heavier. Thus, a
converter is an attractive option, depending on the extent of lens
degredation.
The 180mm 2.8 zuiko gets mixed reviews - some are very happy, others
not. The Tamron 180 usually crops up as the "preferred alternative".
While rare, it seems somewhat cheaper than the Zuiko as well (US$400-ish
as opposed to $600-ish based on recent KEH prices).
Martin
Walt Wayman wrote:
>Martin,
>
>The 100/2 Zuiko is one of my all-time favorite lenses, but I have never tried
>it with either of the Olympus teleconvertrs. Increased focal length is gained
>with converters, but there's always a loss, however small, in resolution and
>contrast. Instead of the 100/2 with the 1.4X-A, I would use instead the
>135/2.8 Zuiko. And rather than the 100/2 and the 2X-A, I'd go for the 180/2.8
>Zuiko, which wouldn't have quite the reach, but it would be a stop faster and
>certainly sharper.
>
>And, by the way, what's your problem with the 180/2.8? I use mine a lot.
>It's my fourth favorite prime, right behind the 100/2, 50/2 and 21/2. It's a
>real pleasure to use, which causes me to reach for it many times before
>breaking out the twice-as-heavy and way more awkward to hold Tamron 80-200/2.8.
>
>Oh, and welcome to the asylum escapee group.
>
>Walt
>
>--
>"Anything more than 500 yards from
>the car just isn't photogenic." --
>Edward Weston
>
> -------------- Original message ----------------------
>From: Martin Walters <mwalters@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>
>>I will finish with a question about the 100/2. I am still getting used
>>to this lens and focussing is a little tricky at large apertures (I
>>haven't shot with anything over 50mm for quite a while). The DOF is
>>quite small compared with the WAs that I'm used to. I have briefly tried
>>the lens with a lowly and old Tamron X2 converter, but the results have
>>been so-so. Does this lens work well with converters, and if so which?
>>Comments welcome.
>>
>>Martin
>>
>>
>>
>==============================================
>List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
>List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
>==============================================
>
>
>
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|