Dawid Loubser wrote:
> ...
> If you need more DOF, then the 200mm and 300mm zuikos, with their much easier
> carrying, make a lot more sense. The OM 300mm f/4.5 is certainly a very very
> good lens, I must say I don't use mine enough.
>
I find a big difference in practical use between the 200s and the
300/4.5. The 200s, and particularly the f5, are easy to carry and use
casually and hand held. The 300/4.5 really is awkward to use without a
tripod, or at least monopod, at least for me.
> The focusing, for tracking any kind of moving target, is terrible on the
> 300/4.5 though.
>
Apparently, I either have stronger hands or my example is unusual, as I
find the focusing action quite good. That said, for tracking moving
things, I'd be using the 28-300 IS lens on the 5D. AF with IS rules for
that use. Then, maybe that's why I find the 300/4.5 focus fine, 'cause I
only use it on a tripod for stationary or close to stationary subjects.
> I wish they had brought out a later, internal focusing variant of one of the
> small 200mm / 300mm lenses.
>
I don't know if it is universally true, but I do know that many internal
focus lenses vary in focal length as they are focused. I'm not sure I
would want that on a long tele.
Moose
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|