Dawid Loubser wrote:
>> Another list member showed me his 100/2 and noted that it was far superior
>> in general use to the 90.
>>
>
> Hi bill, in which ways? Are you talking handling, or optics?
Walt Wayman wrote: Re: the wonderfull 100mm f2
> Yes, it is! I think it and the 50/2 are neck-and-neck for the best of the
> Zuikos, and that's saying a lot.
>
> ...
>
> I'd give up the 35-80/2.8 or the 90/2 before I'd let go the 100/2. I feel
> pretty much the same way about the 135/4.5, too.
>
Walt Wayman wrote: Re: When was the 90/2 Macro introduced?
> I agree. That's why I'm not missing mine. :-) I used it just a few
days ago for some Velvia shots of early crocus blooms. The 100/2 Zuiko
is sharper, and for most macro work, the 90/2.8 Tamron is just as good,
notwithstanding the Zuiko "magic," which doesn't always show up. But it
IS a Zuiko, and once a Zuiko gets here, it doesn't leave.*
>
> From: "Tom Scales" <tscales@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> It is not about the sharpness. It's about the bokeh. The 90/2 is
the smoothest lens I have ever used. I miss it.
========================================================
I believe he is talking about the one I bought from him.
> I have a hard time imagining superior in terms of optics, I really do.
>
Open your mind. :-)
Moose
* It was a bit sad researching this. Walt left before his beloved Zuikos.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|