On 3/18/2013 9:25 PM, DZDub wrote:
> ... I wasn't speculating on optical formula. More like Platonic forms, if
> anything.
Perfect! LOVE it.
> Optical formulas are not really my interest. I just put the key in and drive.
Not a great interest of mine, either. I only look when someone claims something
is the same as something else. And I
also think it's a shame that all the special effort Oly put into the higher end
4/3 lenses can't just be adapted
directly to the new mount.
>> ...
>> The 14-150 is my main lens. It gets significantly closer than the 40-150s
>> and I've been quite happy with IQ from it. If
>> I were going to a show like that, I'd also have the 12-50 along for it's
>> excellent Macro function. The µ4/3 lenses are
>> so small and light that carrying more than one isn't a burden. Rather the
>> opposite of 180/2.8 on 5D. :-)
> I guess that's the one I was badly remembering. What a sweeping range!
Same as the 28-300s I've used on Canon for years. What's amazing is how good
they can be. And especially how well they
work for close-ups at the long end. Most of the longer MF lenses of the prior
era with macro did it at some fixed,
rather short focal length. These new ones have greatest magnification at the
long end, with no special settings needed,
which is great for so many things, like bugs. :-)
> Anyway, sorry to use your name in vain.
No worries, just gives me an excuse to mouth off. ;-)
Babbling Moose
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|