Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [OM] Zuiko 85-250 vs Canon 70-200L (surpise?)

Subject: RE: [OM] Zuiko 85-250 vs Canon 70-200L (surpise?)
From: "Angel Lobo Caballero" <angel.lobo@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 13:15:33 +0200

> Let me step in and defend Gary here.  And as you've mentioned, we all
thank 
> Gary for his fine efforts. I've done some of my own informal testing and
it's 
> a lot of time, work and expense. You really don't need to compare a zoom
to 
> fixed focal length Zuikos because you first want to know how the entire
zoom 
> performs from maximum wide to maximum zoom. As to any specific focal
lengths 
> in between the zoom range, you can extrapolate. As such you can compare
150mm 
> to 135mm or 250mm to 200 or 300mm because the resolution and contrast
aren't 
> going to change that much. The focal length doesn't matter because, I
think, 
> Gary has compensated so that the image size on the slide is the same for 
> every test.
> 
> Warren


Hi Warren and all.

I think Gary don´t need any defense, only need time, film and as we say in
Spain "Health and good food". (Salud y buenos alimentos).

Concerning the quality of a lens in the zoon range, as my experience, I
don´t want  extrapolate along a range of  3x (85-250).  Even on a zoom 2x
(75-150)
all we know this 150 is not "the better 150 on the Olympus Zuiko
catalogue".
You can read any test and see that this 150 have a bad reputation (corner,
low contrast, etc). Looking a this tests (Gary´s test too) we can not get a
conclusion concerning the quality of the 135mm on the zoom 75-150.

I guess this 135 is better than 150 on this zoom, but I can´t know this
thing on the Gary´s test, 25 years later than the M.Phot. test (6/74) also
on 75-100-150.

 I am a landscape photographer, and when I go out with my cameras and
lenses
I say (as everybody) Fix or Zoom ?  For to choose I try to know if the zoom
(on this case 85-250) is   better,equal or worse than what? Than my lenses
of fixed focal lenght: 85 f 2, 100 f 2.8, 135 f 3.5 or f 2.8, 180 f 2.8 and
200 f 4 or f 5. All we know that the intermedial focal lenghts on a zoom
are a gift of the zoom tecnology. I can´t compare the 230mm or the 170mm of
this zoom vs nothing.

Of course I know more f.lenghts = more time, film, etc.

On my non scientifics "real lihgt and real time tests" I test the zoom
75-150 at 75,85, 100, 135 and 150. ( All apertures in all f.lenghts) = 30
slides. And the zoom 85-250 on the same way (85, 100, 135, 180, 200 and
250) = 36 slides.
And I test too every fix lens at every aperture...

What I´m trying to say ?  THERE ARE  A LOT OF SURPRISES .


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 >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz