Hi Andrew,
The best new lens purchase I ever made was my Zuiko Digital 35mm Macro 4/3
lens, straight from B&H for less than US$200. Sure, it is plastic, and the
lens elements are small, but it is AF, and sharp as a tack, and came with
front and rear caps. The front element is set back so far that no hood is
required, so it came to me ready to shoot.
Here is a recent sample of its work:
http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/OldNick/Staggerwing+73.jpg.html
Jim Nichols
Tullahoma, TN USA
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrew Fildes" <afildes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "Olympus Camera Discussion" <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, October 23, 2011 4:18 PM
Subject: Re: [OM] Camera innovation, was Time to move on? Flood delay.
> Kit lenses used to be pretty dreadful, especially when Canikon had to
> compete with Sigma, etc., to put a cheap lens on the camera. Or local
> Pentax agent is also the Sigma agent so the low end of the market was
> flooded with Pentax Sigma combo kits where the lens was valued at less
> than $100.
> However, many kit lenses these days give pretty good results. Where they
> tend to lack is in mechanical quality and robustness.
> What has steamed me up lately is pointless pennypinching. The kits that
> show up with no rear proper rear lens cap, just a cheap push-on cover. How
> much would that cost them? The 14-42mm in the E-PL3 kit had one which is
> almost as heavy as a proper rear cap. Why? And no hood? Olympus always
> used to supply a hood. I just got my new 45,, f1.8 D.Zuiko and guess
> what - no hood. I can get one off ebay for a mere $45-70 though! It's a
> bit of plastic! How little extra would it cost Oly to throw it in?
> I think I'm a bit cross about that.
>
> Oh, and most innovative camera manufacturer? Probably VEB Dresden. :-)
>
> Andrew Fildes
> afildes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
> On 24/10/2011, at 7:56 AM, John Hudson wrote:
>
>> The pixel count might be impressive at upwards of 20mp but the brief web
>> browsing I have done shows that the zoom lenses add only two or three
>> hundred dollars to the cost of the body. How much optical quality does
>> one
>> get for a couple of hundred dollars? I suspect not very much at all.
>
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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/
|
