Why is the 3.5 macro your favorite for family portraits? Does it have better
bokeh then the f2 macro or the regular 1.4? Is It sharper? I tried a 3.5 on
my OM-4T once, borrowed one for a few minutes from a friend in New Mexico,
and it was easy to see through but a lot harder to focus at normal distances
(just like my f2 macro) compared to a regular non-macro 50. My f2 macro is
sharper than my 1.4 but it is such a pain to use and so big that I usually
prefer the 1.4
How did you get a Minolta Acute-Matte screen in your OM? I'm curious because
the 2-13 screens are so costly and hard to find. The minoltas are probably
more common and cheaper....might be a good alternative if I ever need
another screen for my OM's.
--
Chris Crawford
Photography & Graphic Design
Fort Wayne, Indiana
http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com My portfolio
http://blog.chriscrawfordphoto.com My latest work!
http://www.plumpatrin.com Something the world NEEDS.
On 11/30/08 12:48 AM, "C.H.Ling" <ch_photo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 50/3.5 is one of my favourite lens especially good for family portrait.
> Although some complain about the bokeh but I found most of the OOF
> background are quite pleasing. The lens gives bright view with the OM bodies
> and focusing is very easy, it looks more like a F2.8 rather than a F3.5 (I'm
> looking through my OM3 with Minolta Acute Matte focusing screen installed),
> it is sharp with pleasing color.
>
> I had almost all versions of 50mms including the 55/1.2 and I'm still having
> two 50/1.4s, a 50/2 macro and 50/3.5 macro. I don't mind only having the
> 50/3.5 as the only 50mm, I can take my 24/2 or 28/2 in case I need low light
> street work.
>
> C.H.Ling
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Chris Crawford" <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>> As cheap as 50/1.8 lenses are I'd have kept it. I have 3 of them, though
>> one
>> needs work for gummy aperture blades. I don't think I could live with a
>> slow
>> macro as my only 50.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Chris Crawford
>> Photography & Graphic Design
>> Fort Wayne, Indiana
>>
>> http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com My portfolio
>>
>> http://blog.chriscrawfordphoto.com My latest work!
>>
>> http://www.plumpatrin.com Something the world NEEDS.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 11/29/08 11:08 PM, "Ken Norton" <ken@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>> Congratulations. I'm so tied to post-processing these days that I'm not
>>>> sure I could ever present something straight out of the camera today.
>>>> But I should try.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks. I'm not sure which was actually scarier: Doing the street
>>> photography or posting the unedited results. There was a huge temptation
>>> to
>>> convert them to B&W. But that would have violated a couple rules of this
>>> project. B&W is not a crutch to poor photography. Although a few of
>>> those
>>> shots definitely could have been improved had they been B&W.
>>>
>>> As to the lens selection, well, I was going to use the 35/2.8, but
>>> decided
>>> to limit myself to a more "common" focal length. Why the macro? Well,
>>> because the 50/1.8 went to live with somebody else.
>>>
>>> Ken
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|