usher99@xxxxxxx wrote:
>Thanks all. The 85/2 got alot of votes esp for general head and shoulder. I
>did see some quite nice macro shots in the archives with this lens too--
>using extension tubes. I think I owe a few people lunch already (Moose, Jeff,
>Chuck). I still can't quite get over looking for a nice condition 90/2 for
>double duty.
>
>
I went through that. I've had a nice 85/2 for some time, but kept
feeling I was missing something by not having the magical 90/2. Perhaps
you know that zuikoholic "itch"? So I finally found a nice one at a
reasonable price from a list member.
What can I say? I was simply underwhelmed. Perfectly fine lens, but no
better than the 85/2 for general use, and bigger, heavier and with the
aperture ring in the "wrong", place. In macro use, where it should
shine, given that its part of the name, I don't think it's as good as a
tamron SP 90/2.5 or the Kiron 105/2.8.
I know many list members swear by the 90/2, and I'm happy for them.
There is a minority who find it less than spectacular.
As a zuikoholic and with some of Walt's tendency to keep every bit I
ever buy, it was a hard desision to send it on, but I'll have to say I
don't miss it. The 85/2 is just so much more "OM", compact, light and an
excellent lens. For macro, the Kiron is better and goes directly to 1:1
without extension tubes. I'd buy the Kiron or the Viv or Tamron 90/2.8
lenses that also go to 1:1 before the 90/2 for macro.
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|