The thing that I am not convinced of, is the sharpness of the Zuiko's. I
believe all you guys, but since this is the Olympus list, I'll assume a
little bit of biasness.
My 50mm/1.8 is not beatable. But my 28mm is disappointing. My Tokina 90mm
is ok for head shots, since the image is a bit soft, but for macro use, it's
behind. I am thinking about selling my 28mm, and buying a 24mm to replace
it, but I am not sure I am going to do that yet.
My good friend who competes with me in everything for some reason, he bought
a brand spanking new Canon Elan7E, it's HUGE! Autofocus, Image
stabalization, etc.. He spend about $2000 and only has 1 zoom lens and the
body. I've spent about $800, I have 3 primes, a flash, and a body. We
compared the images we both shot.. NOT EVEN CLOSE! Mine blew his away! I
assume that a zoom will be hard pressed to beat a good prime..
The thing I do love is, I have a small bag, very small, the size of a
woman's purse. I have in there: 3 extra rolls of film, 3 lenses, a flash,
and body. It's easy to take along, and I am pretty happy with it. I have
always loved my primes, but I'm wondering if I should get a zoom somewhere
down the line..
I am VERY unhappy with the quality of the 28mm however... Did I get a dud??
Albert
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris O'Neill" <chris@xxxxxxxxx>
To: "Tom Scales" <tscales@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, October 28, 2001 7:58 AM
Subject: Re: [OM] Lens sharpness
> No offense taken, Tom. But, I wasn't talking about price, I was talking
> about useablilty. Sure, I could go out and buy myself a new 1.4
> gigahertz computer with lotsa bells and whistles, but my lowly AMD 350
> mhz system does just fine for what I use it for.
>
> And the same holds true with my OM gear. I could go out and buy an
> expensive N*k*n or other system with all the latest bells and whistles,
> but for what I use my gear for I probably wouldn't use 500f those bells
> and whistles.
>
> So, although my analogy may stink, I think we're in agreement on the
> general point... our OM gear is plenty good when compared with the
> latest and greatest.
>
> Regards,
>
> Chris
>
> P.S. G'luck on the e-Bay auctions!
>
> On 28 Oct 2001, at 9:40, Tom Scales wrote:
>
> > Chris,
> >
> > No offense, but that's a lousy analogy. If lenses were like computers,
> > then the latest Nikon lenses would be 35-80/f 0.1 and cost less than a
> > dollar.
> >
> > I would stake my 90/2, 100/2 and 180/2 against almost anything
available.
> >
> > Just examples.
> >
> > Tom
> >
> > From: "Chris O'Neill"
> > <snip>
> > Personally, I tend to
> > > look at it the same way I look at my computer equipment... no, it
ain't
> > > the newest and fanciest, but it sure does work good and it meets my
> > > needs just fine and dandy.
> > <snip>
> > > Chris
> >
> >
> >
> > < 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 >
> >
>
>
> ---
> I'm *not* a Zuikoholic.... I'm a Zuikohobbyist!
> Chris O'Neill (chris@xxxxxxxxx)
> http://www.joinco.ca
>
> < 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 >
>
>
< 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 >
|