Although it seems I'm the only one who took notice it was only because
the result was really good. I personally have no interest in the lens
no matter how good it is primarily since I do very little macro and
can't justify the money for it when I have workable alternatives... the
OMZ 50/3.5 and the Vivitar Series 1 90/2.5 with 1:1 converter. Just to
show how little macro I do I haven't even tried to fit one of these to
my E-M5 yet let alone use them. Neither have I tried to use my auto
extension tubes. But I'll get there eventually. My future lens
purchases will likely be the 75-300 next and maybe some day the 9-18.
Even if I could easily afford the 60/2.8 I think I'd hesitate based on
short working distance of the short focal length. I also hesitate over
the 9-18 since the the 24mm equivalent of the 12-50 seems to cover most
of what I need and panos usually cover any wider needs.
Chuck Norcutt
On 9/15/2013 12:03 AM, Moose wrote:
> That's one of the big differences between the digital age and film on this
> list - we hardly speak about lenses.
>
> Remember when threads about particular lenses and how they compare to other
> lenses would go on hot and heavy for days -
> or weeks?
>
> An announcement of a new Zuiko macro lens would elicit a flurry of posts. Oly
> announced the µ4/3 60/2.8, stating that it
> is as good as the ZD 50/2. I don't recall it even being mentioned here. I
> only became aware of it wandering about the web.
>
> Anybody know about its unique hood?
>
> I post an image from it, with 100% crop, and comparisons with other M.Z
> lenses, and get one response (Thanks, Chuck!):
>
> On 9/13/2013 5:04 PM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
>> All are very nice within their size domain.
>
> That's it? That's all anyone has to say about a new(ish) lens?
>
> I'm not complaining, just curious. Might it be that contemporary 4/3 and µ4/3
> lenses have reached a point of sufficiency
> such that differences don't matter much, to most of us, most of the time?
> Have all our eyes grown so old that most of us
> can't see the difference any more? :-(
>
> AG is, of course, still singing the praises of certain OM lenses, Mike weighs
> in with images form Bigfoot and its kin
> and Moose mind bending erudite contributions on DOF, motion blur, etc.
>
> And Joel had his recent Summer fling with a strange girl, the ZD 18-180,
> before abandoning her.
>
> But really not that much lens talk.
>
> Just Sayin' Moose
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|