Just went through the same process. Tried the 50mm f1.8 Could not stand the
rattles or flimsy nature of the lens. just felt tacky.
Settled on a 50mm f2.5 lens. Well made, does not rattle, gives up to 1/2 life
size, and seems a fair compromise as a portrait lens.
We all have our thoughts on lens design.
Regards
John Duggan,
Wales, UK
----- Original Message ----
From: Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>
To: Olympus Camera Discussion <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, 4 June, 2010 6:31:53
Subject: Re: [OM] IMG: Microcosmos
On 6/3/2010 3:10 AM, Dawid Loubser wrote:
> [BIG snip].
> Canon's plastic fantastic 50/1.8 is a similar story, optically fantastic, but
> a cheap piece of junk otherwise. I find it interesting that the OM system
> didn't per se produce any badly-built lenses. Perhaps just a different era?
Moose wrote
I'm always curious about the "piece of junk" epithet about this lens. It
seems to me to be better suited for some users than a more sturdily made
lens. What are your criteria? Mine are:
1. Excellent images. And it scores here.
2. Reliability. OK, so it's plastic, and rattles.
3. There when I need it. It's tiny and weighs nothing, so I usually have
it with me. If I had the serious 50/1.4, I'd have it along less often,
as it wouldn't fit where the 1.8 does and would add weight to the kit.
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/
|