On 8/20/2024 2:35 PM, Peter Klein wrote:
To paraphrase Groucho, I love my 50-200, but I only take it out once in a
while. :-)
Seriously, I'm glad I bought the 50-200, because it's a stellar lens. But I'm also glad I picked up the plastic
amateur 40-150 f/4-5.6, which is far better than it has any right to be.
I've become a fan of the 12-200, a useful bit wider and quite a bit longer than
the 14-150.
I used the 14-150 some time ago, then switched to the Panny 14-140 for OIS on the tiny IBIS-less GM5. I had a lot of fun
with that combo. <https://goo.gl/photos/JE6dSSvqHtBRRWXb6>
But I haven't used the 14-140 for a while.
Although the difference 'tween 24 and 28 mm eq. sounds small, I too often found
it not wide enough.
The 12-200 does indeed get softer above 150-ish, but not that much, and with contemporary sharpening tools, that's not a
problem.
When paired with 100-400, 1.4 x TC on a second body, I use the long lens for
anything over 140 mm.
Two bodies and those two lenses are packed up for Sunday departure for
Brooklyn, New England and Scotland,
Travelin' 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/
|