Yes, the 80-200/2.8 Tamron is a fabulous, well-built lens, but it's not as
light and svelte as a Zuiko should be. It's also discontinued, but
available on the used market in excellent shape for $3-400. A great buy!
As for a 50/1.0, Leica has had the Noctilux in its inventory for about 24
years (currently a 50/1.0). It's a big expensive ($2,600) hunk of glass,
but unrivaled at super low light photography. It's too big and specialized
for me, but there's always someone who needs "that one extra stop". On an
SLR, it would probably have to be even bigger than in it's rangefinder
guise (Leica doesn't offer the lens in the R (SLR) mount. Also, the
improved focusing accuracy and brightness of a rangefinder really makes a
difference at the low light levels you'd use with a Noctilux. The depth of
field at F/1.0 is VERY shallow!
Look here for a REAL detailed evaluation
http://www.imx.nl/photosite/leica/m/tests/M10-50.html.
Skip
At 09:50 PM 6/24/00 -0400, you wrote:
> >If I may butt in here.....How about:
> >
> >35/1.4 or 1.8
> >85/1.4 or 1.8
> >50/1.0
> >80-200/2.8
>
There's already an 85/2 Zuiko. But I would agree on the 80-200, except-
isn't there a killer Tamron in that length and speed? Discontinued? ( I
recall drooling over Skip's sample one day)...And what lens line DOES have a
50/1.0 (current), and what *real* advantage would there be over a 50/1.4?
< 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 >
|