Thanks Charlie,
I want an 85 but haven't gotten around to buying one because I already have
a 100mm f2.8 which I think also has very nice Bokeh. I'm hoping to find a
more standard focal length. I may buy a 40mm f2 to try since I just finished
a big graphics job that paid me enough to buy one and I don't happen to have
any bills to pay right at the moment...
Anyone want to sell me one?
On 4/12/07 3:10 PM, "Geilfuss Charles" <Charles.Geilfuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
>
> Chris,
> I agree with all that Martin says but would also suggest you
> consider the 85/2 which, in my very humble and subjective opinion, has
> the *best* bokeh of all the Zuiko lenses and has better
> bang-for-the-buck and is smaller/lighter than the 100/2. Of course this
> statement may be pure "sour grapes" on my part since I don't have no
> stinkin' 100/2.
>
> Charlie
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of Martyn Smoothy
> Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2007 3:21 PM
> To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [OM] Re: Olympus 50mm f1.2 or 55mm f1.2 lenses bokeh?
>
>
> Chris,
>
> Not claiming that these are necessarily "good examples", & bokeh is
> pretty
> much absent in all of them unfortunately, but...
>
> The "normal" pics on this page -
> http://archaeoimages.com/Duxford-01/index.html - are taken with the 55mm
> f1.2 (others use the 16mm fisheye - fairly obvious which are which).
>
> All on this page were taken with the 50mm f1.2 -
> http://archaeoimages.com/Venice-01/index.html. Sold the 55mm after I got
> the
> 50mm (but it doesn't get a lot of use). Bokeh with the 100mm f2 is much
> nicer :-)
>
> Regards - Martyn
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx]On
> Behalf Of Chris Crawford
> Sent: 12 April 2007 18:29
> To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [OM] Olympus 50mm f1.2 or 55mm f1.2 lenses bokeh?
>
>
>
> I've got a couple "Made in Japan" 50mm f1.8 lenses and hate them because
> of
> their harsh, ugly Bokeh, as in this example:
>
> http://chriscrawfordphoto.com/fine_art/portfolio/antiwar/photopages/anni
> vers
> ary3.htm
>
> I've heard that the 50 and 55mm f1.2 lenses were better in that respect.
> Has
> anyone used them? I'm not likely to use the lens wide open, mostly I'd
> be
> using it outdoors like the portrait example shown, at f4 or f5.6. I see
> Olympus America has a 55 f1.2 on ebay for $350 and would consider buying
> it
> if it would solve my problem.
>
> I've looked online and couldn't find any good example photos taken with
> either lens.
>
> Mike Johnson, the former magazine editor who runs the Online
> Photographer
> blog says that the 40mm f2 has beautiful bokeh, but its expensive ($525
> at
> Keh) and I haven't seen much taken with it either.
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> --
> Chris Crawford
> Photography & Graphic Design
> Santa Fe, New Mexico
>
> http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com
>
> http://www.plumpatrin.com Something the world NEEDS.
>
>
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
>
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|