Kris wrote:
>I have a Tokina 35-105mm that is
>newly acquired. I am finding it VERY difficult to focus when
>you go past 50mm, I'm not even sure if I'm getting my shots in
>focus ( still waiting on the developing). I use the OM-10 which, I
>think, is one of the most difficult to focus. Any thoughts? My
>80-200mm doesn't seem to be this difficult to focus!
I have a 35-105 Tokina also (probably the same?), and used it for 8
years as my one and only lens, together with an OM-10 (it came with
that body, as a matter of fact). I sold the body, but the lens I still
have; I like its one-touch design which runs very smooth and fast
(probably because it's used so much), which allows very fast zooming
and focusing at the same time. What probably gives you trouble is the
fact that at the longer focal length this lens has a speed of 5.6,
which darkens the split image and microprisms. Try ignoring these
focusing "aids" and learn focusing on the surrounding matte area. This
is one of the reasons why I switched to the OM-"pro" line, allowing me
to switch focusing screens to the 1-4 or 2-4 that have no split image
or microprisms at all. Is your 80-200 faster than 5.6 at 200? That
would explain the difference. If not, there may be something wrong with
the 35-105.
>On the topic of films, I like your comment. Do you think 35mm quality
>is closing the gap on medium format? What films are most comparable
>in quality to Medium format? Do you think 35mm films will ever get so
>good that medium format is not needed?
When I would say medium format is becoming obsolete, I would be flamed
by all those who have pumped thousands and thousands of dollars in
their overweighted MF babies and caress them as being superiour to 35
mm. Facts are, however, that recent 35 mm films, using APS technology
(Kodak calls it T grain) can be enlarged to big poster format without
showing grain. When you need a magnifying glass to show the differences
between the results produced by an OM+Kodak Ektar 100, or an
Mamamia/Hackselblock+Kodak GPX 160, and your customers or "audience"
can't tell the diffence anyway, you might wonder if it was worth the
money. But, I must admit, the Hackselstuff looks much more
"professional". And the GPX has better skin tones (fortunately also
available in 35 mm). And the new Ektar will obviously also become
available in 120 roll film (if it isn't already). Obviously there will
always be a gap between the two formats, but while film quality
improves every year, the poster format that justifies all these MF
investments becomes larger and larger.
Hans
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|