I think it is important to look at the lenses you've been using.
The 5D has some very expensive and top rated long telephotos but their
affordable selection is limited. 200/2.8 at $660 seems to be a good but not
exciting choice. Probably the 70-200/2.8 at $1700 would get more use but
it's sure not pocket change and it is a heavy lens. The 300/4 is $1100 and
probably too slow to use with a TC and get good AF. The 400/5.6 is $1100 and
doesn't have IS. I can't see the AF making it significantly better than the
400/4 MF Tamron. C*non came out with a new 16-35 which should do fine for
the wide end at $1600. So ... I still don't have a single AF lens for my 5D.
The E-System has a limited selection of lenses but they cover very nice
ranges. 7-14 has little competiton if you need ultrawide. The 11-22 is a
very good lens which is probably wide enough to cover everything for me but
my real estate photography. The 11-22 is what motivated me to buy my E1 I'm
very happy with it.. The 15-54 does just fine. I'm surprised Olympus hasn't
come out with a more expensive alternative however since everyone will want
a lens in this range. The 50-200 for me is somewhat like the sweet little
50-250 OM Zuiko. It isn't the ultimate long tele but it is very easy to
carry, yields good pictures, and especially in combination with the TC
covers essentially the whole long telephoto range. The faster D.Zuikos get
expensive quickly. The 35-100/f2 is $2500 and wouldn't yield a shallower DOF
than the Tamron 80-200/2.8 on an OM. The manual focus long teles work fine
on the E-System with the 2x of the smaller image giving some very long tele
capability. I'm not sure how the old lenses will hold up to a 10M pixel
sensor though. They seem to be great with the E-1 and my limited experience
with the E300 seemed to be good.
If Olympus sticks to their apparently re-awakened interest in building
small, light, cameras and lenses their system is more attractive to me than
the 5D.
YMMV, good luck,
-jeff
On 5/9/07, swisspace <swisspace@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>
> I considered the 11-22 but dismissed it as I would always want that bit
> wider than it gave and end up buying the 7-14mm anyway.
>
>
> As far as I see it I have two options
> 1. look out for a 5D upon which to use my existing wide angles 17,21 and
> 24 and other quality glass
>
> plusses even with the fact that the E1 doubles the focal length the
> center crop from a 5D would match it close enough as demonstarted by
> moose. I would not be committed to one particular brand or mount. It may
> also do justice to the 180F2 and I also gain clean high iso
>
> minuses not weather sealed and potential for sensor dust - body will
> become next to worthless quite soon
>
> 2. buy a 7-14 and continue using my E1
>
> plusses - weather sealed, solid and with two lenses I cover from 14-108
> equiv, throw in a 90f2 and I should have most things covered.
> 7-14mm should retain some resale value
>
> minuses - stuck with one mount and possibly brand (yes I know its
> olympus but hey). poor high iso when compared with above
>
>
>
> IanW
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|