Ken, you've created a bit of a conundrum for yourself. You really,
really
like your 35/2.8 and 100/2.8 lenses (don't we all know...). I am not
sure
that you'll be that much happier with the f/2 versions of the exact same
focal lengths, and there really is not much point in duplication,
unless you see
yourself selling the f/2.8 version.
Since you have 24mm and 35mm well-covered, I don't think a 28mm will
buy you much,
at least (again) if you're not going to sell one of the others.
What you want, big guy, is either a 21/2.0 or a 90/2.0 Macro. I use my
"big white"
about once a month - and I am in love with the images it produces -
it's not an
everyday lens. You want something to experience every day. You will
experience
visceral pleasure if you put either a 21/2.0 or 90/2.0 on your OM-3Ti,
believe me:
* The 90/2.0 Macro, as I, and many others, have so often said, has a
truly special
character. It's extraordinary, in it's ability to produce images
with super-high
resolution that are "gentle" - not clinical like the competition.
You won't enjoy
the size though, you really won't. It'll blow your 100/2.8 away,
yet be different
enough to warrant keeping both, especially the 100/2.8 for when you
want it to
fit in your pocket.
* The 21/2.0 on the OM-3Ti is, for lack of a better word, orgasmic.
Nothing in the
world compares with the compositional experience, it's a bright as
the best aux.
finders for rangefinders (with 2-series 'screen, of course), but
with 100%
compositional and focusing accuracy, anywhere on the frame. Olympus
has produced
two really "ultimate" lenses (the two F2 lenses on at the ends of
the focal
length spectrum) and the 21/2.0 is every bit as exciting and
surreal as the 250/2.0.
For "everything sharp, right across the frame" my copy of the 21/2.0
falls short, it's
excellent except for about the last 5mm of the frame (which people
often crop off).
No matter what aperture, it sucks there (field curvature, possibly de-
centering?).
However, I shoot this lens very often at f/2.0, and it gives me great
pleasure,
and over most of the frame, performance is truly excellent. It fits
*perfectly*
on an OM body, and is particularly pretty and handy on the 3Ti.
You have hinted before at 21mm being "too wide", but why not see this
as a challenge
to tame this difficult focal length?
Anyway, that's what I would do. Of course, if money is no object, the
24/3.5 Shift
could be special too... But I'd still choose the 21/2, just because it
allows me to
shoot Ilford Pan F in poor light :-)
Dawid "do it, Ken" Loubser
On 04 Mar 2011, at 7:27 PM, Ken Norton wrote:
> Allow me this moment to dream a bit...
>
> If I were to treat myself to one really special lens, kinda as an
> award to myself and as an OM silver anniversary gift what would you
> recommend?
>
> 1. 90mm F2 macro
> 2. 100mm F2 telephoto
> 3. 35mm F2
> 4. 28mm F2
>
> I'm trying to be halfway reasonable, otherwise I'd be mentioning one
> of the "Big Whites".
>
> At issue, though, is that each one of these lenses really is a
> duplication of some form to what I currently have. Well, I don't have
> a 28mm, but I've got F2.8 lenses covering all the above focal lengths.
> I figure that any of the above has still got to be cheeper than buying
> a Leica.
>
> Oh, and one other thing... Is it OK for me to think about black-
> nosed lenses?
>
> AG (dreaming) Schnozz
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|