[OM] Re: Digital, digital, digital. Bah, humbug!

[Joel Wilcox]

At 07:40 PM 4/13/2005 -0400, Earl you wrote:
>Walt, I pretty much feel the way you do,  BUT.... even the digital talk
>teaches me something, and a lot of talk there is stuff like "the 50/f3.5
>kicks butt on an E-x!" that makes me feel good.  Now all I need is a
>50/f3.5...

So does the 28/2, 90/2, and 180/2.8.  My 100/2.8 is good and sharp, but not 
as neutral as the others (warms things up noticeably -- little tweak to the 
auto WB might be all it needs, or just postprocess).  I have to leave 
something for Ken to sort out!

Higher stops are great, too (f11, f16).  I'm certain now that Olympus 
doesn't recommend them because the camera will usually underexpose without 
the precaution of exposure compensation.

Perhaps that seems like a pain, but not to me.  I get images back with the 
familiar "stamp" of these beloved lenses.  Pretty darn nice.

I have a little trouble focusing the 28/2 and 180/2.8.  But the 90/2 just pops!

Joel W.



==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================