Hip Moose writes:
>Nothing against the likely performance. I'm simply not interested in
35-70 zooms. I bought the f4 Zuiko in the dim past, and it was an
excellent >combination for years paired with an 80-200 on my OM-2n.
>But now I can get longer range with sufficient quality, so 35-70 is
passé.
Understood, but I treat it as a speciality landscape prime in zoom
clothing esp at the short end. From what I have seen the Contax N 24-85
converted more resembles the Zeiss rendering of the c/y 35-70 than the
Canyon 24-105. I never recall a landscape being better with the 24-105
than the Zeiss 35-70. The C/Y behaves better with the sun in the frame
IIRC than the Contax N but the latter is fully automatic on Canyon.
http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/35mm_test.html
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1034864
It is a bit of a dust pump one touch zoom. if I didn't get a mint copy
for a good price or had the Zuiko 35-80 I wouldn't have bothered.
The microcontrast/rendering for some images is just the ticket, however.
I think it will make the cut on the upcoming trip as well as the 4T or
perhaps the my trusty OM2 if John finishes up with it. Marnie doesn't
like the 4T LCD business.
Bag is too heavy already, Mike
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|