> As for the 180/2.8, I've been wanting to try one...only thing stopping me is
> the size. The 200/4 is pretty small and a great performer, which makes it
> hard to justify the price of the 180/2.8.
Joel has the 180/2.8 and I've got the 200/4. Side by side comparison,
is that the 180 seems a little more contrasty and tends to "pop" into
focus whereas the 200 "mushes" its way into focus. But from other
attributes, I doubt I'd be able to pick out a photo taken from one or
the other.
Although, I think the 180/2.8 does better on the OM bodies because of
the shutter-vibration/aperture-actuation induced blurring. On the
E-system, the 200/4 is just peachy, but on the OM, it's harder to
tame.
AG
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|