Hi Nicholas, Moose and all,
From: Nicholas Herndon <nherndon@xxxxxxxxx>
>Nic, I happened to stumble across a 200/5 for next to nothing.
<snip>
>It was slow, soft, and really the only
>thing it had going for it was its tiny size.
<snip>
>The 200/4 is much superior
Well, the 200/4 is really *superb*, so being 'worse' than it is not
necessarily a bad thing... ;-)
I have to admit that I haven't used the 200/5 much, but I took it in a
couple of trips and gave quite satisfactory results. Now I've borrowed a
rare MC version in order to compare both. A sample pic with that MC 200/5
and my GF-1:
<http://www.flickr.com/photos/zuiko21/4248541212/in/set-72157623172804580/>
From: Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>
>Anytime anyone comments on performance of these lenses, you really need
>to know how they were used, supported and at what shutter speeds.
Certainly. The "problem" with the 200/4 is vibration control, otherwise it
has unbelievable sharp optics, even wide open. In fact, this "sensitivity"
makes it a very fine lens for astrophotography: its low inertia (not sure
about the proper physical term) makes tracking with an equatorial mount much
easier and accurate, which is the key for sharp results in deep-sky
photography.
I once compared two setups for astropics:
Olympus OM4 + Zuiko 200/4
Yashica FX3 + Sonnar 135/2.8
Both sets weight *exactly* the same, but the Oly gear *feels* much 'lighter'
on the hand... in a way, it's "easier to turn", which is good on a telescope
but "bad" on a tripod without further vibration control.
>The vibration problem is much less at higher shutter speeds and the
>"wet" human body is a good vibration damper.
Couldn't agree more. My quick tests of telephoto lenses are usualy handheld,
around 1/1000 or faster (GF1) and often with one side of the focusing ring
leaning on a vertical surface for extra steadyness. Never got a
motion-burred piuctured this way.
>Same tripod/camera set-up
>with a 5# bag of lead shot draped over body and lens and you're golden.
Yes, the classic "bean bag". Never tried it, sounds interesting.
>Same tripod set-up, but with with mirror-aperture prefire on an OM-2S,
>4(x), OMPC or OM2000 and you will get much better results than with the
>earlier bodies, even without additional vibration control, but not as
>good as slower speeds as with it.
It's true, but I'll add that the 2S or PC alone, with their delayed, smooth
program-capable auto-iris mechanism may help also. They *feel* much
smoother.
Cheers,
--
Carlos J. Santisteban Salinas
IES Turaniana (Roquetas de Mar, Almeria)
<http://cjss.sytes.net/>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|