It's really a great lens. I had one for about 10 years, bought new. It wasn't
so compeling that I'd sell both a 50/3.5 and a good 50/1.8 for one, esp given
the low prices for those other two lenses vs. the expensive 50/2. But it's
definitely a notch above the other 50's in image quality.
The 50/2's versatility can't be beat, but I found that the lens was just a
little too big to be comfortable on my OM bodies. It's kind of like the 90/2,
which is a great lens and the only top-end Zuiko that I've kept, but it's not
the best handling lens, being easily beat out by the 85/2, 100/2.8, or even the
100/2.
Skip
----- Original Message ---------------
Subject: [OM] 50mm f/2 macro
From: Gene Wilburn <cdnphoto@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 21:58:15 -0500
To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
>Another 'newbie' question. Is this lens as good as it's cracked up to
>be by Bill Johnston (Sunday Morning Photographer) or is that a bit of
>hype? It's terribly expensive for a 50mm. Does it do macro any
>seriously better than the 50mm f/3.5? As I settle back into my OM
>system I'm thinking longer term about what lenses I want to acquire
>and use and this one has always puzzled me ... a lens to keep on the
>radar or not?
>
>Gene
>
>==============================================
>List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
>List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
>==============================================
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|