On Nov 23, 2007 3:13 AM, Peter Leyssens <peterleyssens@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > The first thing you'll want to consider is which of your OM lenses
> > will work well on digital. There's a number of wide lenses I wish I'd
> > never sold (16mm, 18mm, 21/3.5) as they work really well on a Canon
> > 5D it seems. Apparently the smaller aperture models are better than
> > faster. Some love an OM 200mm on an Oly digital (400mm, f4 equivalent!).
> > A friend who works in a camera store just put an OM 50/1.4 late model
> > on a Canon 10D and was astonished by how much better it was than the
> > good quality (but not L grade) zoom that he'd been using. And he
> > traded it in for US$25.
> > Andrew Fildes
>
> Andrew,
>
> I've considered that. As stated above, the 40-150 looks like the
> ideal long lens with an IS body, as it's very pocketable. The 90/f2
> will stay and so will the 50/f1.4 except if somebody offers me a
> *really* good price. I have a 200/f4 but I don't see a reason to keep
> it.
The 90/2 is an excellent choice. Hang on to it as it carries over to
digital most of the qualities for which it is valued for film, and you
won't encounter those qualities among the DZs at present. The 50/3.5
has also been a splendid performer for me. The wider lenses not so
much. Ag has gotten some wonderful results with the 100/2.8 and
200/4. The 200/4 arguably performs better on a digital body than on
an OM body. The 200/4 is the only film lens I have bought since I got
the E-1. I sold my original one, saw what Ag Schnozz was able to do
with it on an E-1, and snapped up another when I got a chance.
Admittedly, I cover that focal length most of the time with the DZ
50-200, and you'll do something similar I would guess. But you might
want to try the 200/4 with an adapter before parting with it. Just a
word to the wise. :)
Oh yes, welcome back, Peter.
Joel W.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|