On 17 Sep 98 at 15:18, Joseph Albert wrote:
> I'm not sure how to interpret this, but the 35-85/2.8 is a superb lens that
> can stand up with the very expensive f/2.8 standard zooms of today.
Wish I'd known this a few years ago - I saw one of these for less than the cost
of a similar Series 1 28-70 (?) (about $150 CDN I think), but passed on both.
I assumed the varifocal indicated an inferior design...
> re: 35/2.8 and flare-- I was never able to flare the single-coated 35/2.8
> Zuiko I used to own, but I never pointed it at the sun high in the sky.
> However, even 30 degrees about the horizon it would image the sun just fine.
> I sometimes wonder if the sample-to-sample consistency of the f/2.8
> Zuikos is as good as the f/2 ones.
Mine is very well used, bought new around 1978, but the glass is mint. It has
been serviced once at an Oly service centre when sand got in the focussing
helical about 8 years ago. I find the most flare prone situations are when the
sun is near the edge of the frame or just outside the frame and more than 10
deg above the horizon. With the proper hood (thanks to Gary S.! :-) hopefully
this will improve. I should say that this lens has taken many great, contrasty
shots with the sun in the frame also. Shooting handheld in bright sunlight when
I am unable to use my hands to shade the lens is usually when flare becomes an
issue and I may have trouble avoiding it.
I would say the flare performance is still better than the N*k*n 28-80
f/3.5-4.5 zoom in similar situations.
========================
Shawn Wright
Computer Systems Manager
Shawnigan Lake School
250-743-6240
swright@xxxxxxxxx
< 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 >
|