Yes, the "tiny" 40/2 is only a little shorter than the 50/1.8. It's
probably not as sharp as the 50 either :>), but for me it is a
delightful little lens. I have more possibilities for framing with
the 40's (or 35's) angle of view. I still have not given up on my
50/1.2 though.
I shall start to look for a 90/2, but in the meantime I might try
harder to use my 85/2 with a real Zuiko auto extension ring(s) for
portability and relative cost-effectiveness. The 90/2 does look
quite compact though.
Chris
At 23:48 -0700 11/7/02, Richard F. Man wrote:
Well, I think Tom made the observation that the Voigtlander 40/2 is
fairly big, unlike the Zuiko pancake. As for the 125, 700g is close
to 1 3/4 lbs? That's a heft lens. So you are talking two big lens
here. CameraQuest is advertising the 125/2.5 for around $650, which
is about the price for a good 90/2. I would take the 90/2 and if
needed, add an extension lens to get the extra reach.
I just got the 40/2. While it is actually a bit bigger than I
imagine (I guess I was thinking about a real pancake :-) ), I like
the angle of view a lot. I took couple rolls with it and are very
happy w/ the performance. I think it will be my "standard" lens.
The 90/2 is of course just amazing. Many people have said that it's
a lens that you will never regret that you have purchased. I am
inclined to agree with that.
--
<|_:-)_|>
C M I Barker
Cambridgeshire, Great Britain.
?
+44 (0)7092 251126
mailto:imagopus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
mailto:zuiko@xxxxxxx
http://www.threeshoes.co.uk
... a nascent photo library.
< 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 >
|