----------
> De: VELUWEH@xxxxxxxxxx
> A: - (052)olympus(a)zuiko.sls.bc.ca
<olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Asunto: Re: [OM] Comments on 85/2.0 requested
> Fecha: martes 20 de octubre de 1998 11:32
>
> Jason wrote:
>
> >I've been shopping for a medium OM tele and I thought I should just
> >forget about the wonderful 100/2.0 'cause it's just so spendy. However,
> >do any of you out there think that the 85/2.0 might be a smart
> >substitute? Or is fast glass ALWAYS expensive ($300+)? What's the
> >current market value of this lens? I thought I would sit tight until I
> >could find a 100/2.8, but I haven't read too many positive things about
> >it while I've been waiting.
> >Thanks in advance for any comments regarding the fast 85.
>
> Both the 85/2.0 and the 100/2.8 are excellent portrait lenses. That's
> why I have both :-) The latter is cheaper but the former is better
> suited for hand-held available light photography. It allows 1/60 sec
> (when both you and your subject aren't moving) where the 100 mm is
> (generally speaking) better off with 1/125 sec., so you actually gain
> two stops.
>
> 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 >
And what abuot the 8 blades (85 2) vs 6 blades (100 2.8) ?
The 50 1.4, the 85 2, and the cheap 135 3.5 have all 8 blades. Thinking of
the out of focus creative work, I don´t know why Olympys make a lens of
this focal length with only 6 blades.
My 100 2.8 is :
ZUIKO MC AUTO - T 1:2.8 f = 100 mm 186908
I think it´s a beautifull lens. I don´t know the number of blades of the
series with not engraved "MC", neither the number of blades of the mitical
100 f 2.
Ángel Lobo
CUENCA (Spain)
< 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 >
|