Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [OM] 21mm vs. 24mm - major zuik-fix! :) - long

Subject: RE: [OM] 21mm vs. 24mm - major zuik-fix! :) - long
From: "Olaf Greve" <o.greve@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2001 16:07:01 +0200
Hi Bill,

>>and I really don't want to get too many lenses either

>Olafo, I really enjoyed your post,

Thanks, I knew the Zuikoholics would enjoy reading it :)

>however I'm having difficulty with this concept.  Perhaps there is some
problem with the
>translation of the phrase.  Bill Barber

Nope, in this case I'm a bit a-typical for a Zuikoholic, as I have come to
the terrible realisation that I actually do _not_ need all the different OM
lenses in order to get better pictures. As a matter of fact, when I still
only had my OM-40, the 50/1.8 and the 28/3.5, my pictures were often better
than what I got when carrying some 6 lenses around. Indeed, when I have too
many lenses with me I at times find myself wondering too much about which
lens best to use in the situation at hand, this then takes important
attention away from the real issue at hand: getting the best possible
composition.

Don't get me wrong, I do enjoy having some specialty lenses, but I am
working on getting a core-group next to them which are to be the lenses I
will become most familiar with and which I will get to know thoroughly
enough to quickly grab the right one and shoot the picture.

For now, my ideas are to have the following core line-up:
24/2 : Ultra wide work (should I find that the 24/2 does not work
satisfactorily, I may try to replace this one with a 21/2)
28/2 : Normal wide angle work
35-80/2.8 : General purposes
100/2 : Portraiture and general purposes

The trend is obvious: all of them have very distinct focal lenghts, and all
of them are very fast and stellar performers.

At present, I have classified all my other lenses as being
deprecated/special use lenses. These are:
24/2.8 : deprecated due to the 24/2
28/3.5 : deprecated due to the 28/2 - this lens belongs to my father
50/1.8 : deprecated due to the overlap with the 35-80/2.8 (yes, I know, the
50/1.8 is faster and lighter). Gioconda now happily uses this lens.
50/3.5 : specialised lens, macro work.
35-70/3.6 : deprecated due to the 35-80/2.8
65-200/4 : special lens, longer telephoto work.
135/2.8 : deprecated due to the 100/2 - this lens belongs to my father
300/4.5 : special lens, long telephoto work.

So, the lenses in this category do not see a lot of use (anymore), and some
of them may eventually be sold (with exception of the special use lenses,
and the ones owned by my father).

We'll see how this will work out, but so far the above set of core-lenses
(with the 24/2.8 instead of the 24/2) has proven very satisfactorily for me
over the last few months, so it seems this is a nice selection indeed.

Then, Alan also made a valid point, but Gioconda is not so much against me
getting a lot of gear, just as long as there's enough money for other things
(such as shoes ;) ) too.

At present, if you open my "Olympus cabinet" you will find that I seek the
gear investments more in other parts of the OM system than the lenses, e.g.,
my flash gear is "quite" extensive, this serves special purposes too: a T32
for general purposes (travels along with the core lens group), an F280 for
fill flash, a T28 Twin Flash for macro work, and 2 T20s for studio stuff (in
combination with the T32 and the T28).

To summarise: during typical trips I tend to carry not too much with me
(though on longer trips I jam-pack my LowePro minitrekker ;) ), and I use
the special use lenses when needed.

Cheers!
Olafo


< 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