Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] A Whole Bunch of Stuff...Volume II

Subject: Re: [OM] A Whole Bunch of Stuff...Volume II
From: T.Clausen@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 19:26:03 +0100 (CET)
Hello Johs,

On Tue, 12 Mar 2002, Josh Lohuis wrote:

> Hello Everyone,
> 

Long emails demand long replies ;)

<SNIP>
 
> me.  Four days in a city 20 times larger than mine, and only 4 rolls?
> What's wrong with me?
> 

Well......I'm european.....and I have never been to Ottawa. But I have
been to cities in the north american continent, where I would be hard
pressed to take even one film.....

>    The next order of business is my purchases.  I bought a 135 2.8 from
> another list member (it is a Sigma) for $100CAN, and I bought a 200 f/4
> Zuiko for $130CAN.  I have a few questions.  The 200 is a silvernose,

Uhmm....;) 

> but
> the reflections are green and purple.  Can a silver nose be MC? S/N 156873 I
> didn't know that the silver nose(s) of that lens would look so good on an
> all black body. 

I have no idea if they can be M/C. Neither of my 200/4 are
silvernose. However get ready to fall absolutely in love with that
lens. I've got two, as I mentioned, and I am absolutely happy: I find that
the size, weight and image quality makes it a very very attractive lens. I
can stuff the 200/4 in the inner pocket without looking too silly...try
that with e.g. the famed 180mm's.

Also (thanks Bernd), I recently discovered that in combination with a
Motor Drive 1 and the control grip (what's the number? It's the pistol
grip), I can hand-held the 200/4 down to 1/30s (indoor, no tripod no
flash and a PanF in the camera....).

> Another thing I would like to ask about is image quality.
> Is a Zuiko really that much better than something else.  I have heard some
> people say they even prefer a Tamron over the Zuiko's.  Is this more of a
> subjective thing, rather than a scientific type of deal? 

All I can say is, that the image quality of my Zuiko's has been
significantly better than that of the third party lenses I've
had (save for two, where I am not sure). Following that, I have only
Zuiko's left. Strictly unscientific, of course ;) IMO, if you like the
results you get from your body/lens, then stick to it. However more
"factual", I've found my zuikos to be more compact and/or have a larger
maximum apeture than the third party's I've had.

Then again: there are often two series of Zuiko's (135/2.8 vs 135/3.5),
aiming differently. Likewise, there's no one single label to put on "third
party lenses". I'd imagine that many off-brand manufacturer maintain
similar lines (consumer/pro lenses).

Again, the best is to try the lens and see if you like the result.

The two lenses that I still have are Sigma. The 50-200 apo and the 21-35
(I think also apo..?). Based on my strictly subjective criteria, they are
good (i.e.: I can take photos I like with them). They are big and heavy,
though: the 50-200 is heavy and the 21-35 is big ;)

Any other zuikoholics with a comment on either of these lenses? I seem to
recall that they were in the category "pricy for a third party lens" when
I bought them.

Ohh....I also have a Sigma 2x teleconverter.  Last time I used it was in
conjunction with the 200/4 in a zoo, where the lion absolutely insisted on
staying as far away from the visitors as possible. I am neither impressed
or depressed by the teleconverter - it just doesn't get much workout...



> Another thing I
> wanted to ask about was lens caps.  All my lenses have generic caps that
> "click in" by means of two tabs on opposite sides.  I noticed that a few of
> these will let out tiny pin points of light where the tabs are.  I thought
> caps were supposed to be light tight.  I know that sometimes I have to
> rewind my film half way, and when I put it back in I have to fire the
> shutter many times to advance the film to where I left off.  Would the tiny
> points of light affect the images already taken?  Is there a way to advance
> the film without firing the shutter? (probably not) Another thing that

You could mount a body-cap on the body? Requires dismounting the lens,
though, but...?

I've got a bunch of generic lens-caps (front and back), however I've
recently ordered Olympus ditto's from John H. I have only one reason: I
like how they look ;)

<SNIP>
 
>   Another thing I wanted to ask was: how do I clean the mirror. 

With uttermost care! For all I am concirned, pretty much anything you do
will make it more dirty.

If you insist, then take a pincet (is that the word? The thing doctors do
to pick up things inside peoples bodies), cover the tips with something
non-scratch. Then grap a piece of lens paper, fold it carefully to 
something like 1 cm wide. Mount in the pincet. Breath on the mirror and
wipe it off, one strip. Unfold/fold the lens paper to get to a fresh
spot. Repeat (one strip). Someone reccomended that procedure to me, and it
seems to be the best I've managed to come around....

> I know it
> doesn't matter if there is crap there, it kind of bothers me when I see all
> kinds of dust and other items when I look through the viewfinder.  I am sure
> that soap, water, and a face cloth is a bad thing,

Yup. As is a steel brush on your dremel not going to improve things.....

> so what should I use.

Care. Extremely care....

> Another thing that really bothered me this weekend was changing lenses.  I
> know have four, and I find that I always want to change (not always, just
> often)  is there anyway that I can change lenses without so much balancing
> and trouble. I feel like a circus act trying to juggle around three lenses
> whilst listen to my mom tell me to move out of the middle of the sidewalk.
> 

Well, then why change? Make yourself this exercise: one body, one
lens. Make each frame you shoot a "piece of art". I.e. take care to
position yourself correctly. Don't use the "if only I had an XXX mm
here" as an excuse for not making a good picture. Make one anyways. It
will be a different one, to be sure, but still.

For my medium format, I have only one lens. Sure, I'd like another -
something in the area of 210mm would be nice for perspective
reasons. However I've had my MF camera with that lens for a couple of
years, and have taken a lot of pictures - some even good. And never once
did I have to give up due to lack of a specific lens. 

(Of course, this doesn't apply if you're requirements are "astro" or
"macro" or something).

I re-give myself the above exercise with selected lenses from time to
time, not to forget - and not to let myself become a slave of my gear.

>   The last question I can remember (I had an eight hour drive, so I did a
> lot of thinking)

(your next purchases have to be a pda and a cell phone..)

<SNIP>

Good luck with everything. Let's know how your pictures turned out -
preferably show us ;)

-- 

-------------------------------------------
  Thomas Heide Clausen
  Civilingeniør i Datateknik (cand.polyt)
  M.Sc in Computer Engineering

  E-Mail: T.Clausen@xxxxxxxxxxxx
  WWW:    http://www.cs.auc.dk/~voop
-------------------------------------------



< 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