Both.
Jim Nichols
Tullahoma, TN USA
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chuck Norcutt" <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "Olympus Camera Discussion" <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, January 27, 2012 12:58 PM
Subject: Re: [OM] Standard lens focal lengths, was: Nathan's PAD 26/1/2012:
bokeh and high ISO
> But when you're using it are you typically using it as a macro lens or
> as a more general purpose picture taker?
>
> Chuck Norcutt
>
>
> On 1/27/2012 12:41 PM, Jim Nichols wrote:
>> Hi Chuck,
>>
>> I often use the ZD 35 Macro on my E-1, and it seems just fine. That is
>> the
>> first "70mm" I have owned since I sold my Leitz 73mm f/1.9 Hektor from
>> the
>> 1930s.
>>
>> Jim Nichols
>> Tullahoma, TN USA
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Chuck Norcutt"<chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> To: "Olympus Camera Discussion"<olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Sent: Friday, January 27, 2012 5:12 AM
>> Subject: [OM] Standard lens focal lengths, was: Nathan's PAD 26/1/2012:
>> bokeh and high ISO
>>
>>
>>> I've always considered the omission of prime lenses of about 70mm focal
>>> length a bit of an oddity in 35mm photography. If we consider 50mm the
>>> de-facto standard and we wanted to build a set of primes that doubled or
>>> halved the image area at each step we'd choose a set with:
>>> 17,5mm, 25mm, 35mm, 50mm, 70mm, 100mm, 140mm, 200mm, 280mm, 400mm.
>>>
>>> Typical prime lens availability options from the manufacturers usually
>>> come pretty close to this set except for the 70mm option. Instead of
>>> 70mm we jump to the portrait or macro range of 85-90mm. How come? Why
>>> the hole in angular coverage of primes? There's another oddity in that
>>> the next most common lens down from 35mm is 28mm and not 24/25mm. But I
>>> think that's a manufacturing price break thing as well as a
>>> consideration for limiting distortion.
>>>
>>> Of course, some would say that the standard lens should be 43mm and not
>>> 50mm which would place the next focal length up the scale at 60mm but
>>> that's a different story.
>>>
>>> Chuck Norcutt
>>>
>>>
>>> On 1/27/2012 12:48 AM, Chris Barker wrote:
>>>> That works well, Nathan.
>>>>
>>>> But apart from the low light performance, what other use is there for
>>>> a lens with the efl of around 65mm? I would love to have an excuse
>>>> to save up for one :-)
>>>>
>>>> Chris
>>>>
>>>> On 26 Jan 2012, at 22:09, Nathan Wajsman wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> We had our monthly wine tasting at the office this evening, which
>>>>> provided a good opportunity to show off my 1.9/43mm Pentax lens
>>>>> wide open:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.greatpix.eu/All/Picture-A-Day/4253606_kdsZ6C#!i=1687409995&k=FMxHGG5&lb=1&s=O
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> http://www.greatpix.eu/All/Picture-A-Day/4253606_kdsZ6C#!i=1687410074&k=W8W7cR7&lb=1&s=O
>>>>>
>>>>> I find its bokeh quite pleasing, and the performance of the K5 at
>>>>> ISO 6400 is much better than my other camera's ;-)
>>>>
>>> --
>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>> 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/
>
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|