Schnozz,
Your kit sounds a lot like my kit, except my 24 f/2.8 is a Vivitar, the
35 and 50 are MC, and I have an 85/2 SC instead of the 100/2.8.
I'll ask you Stupid question #678 while the helicopters have you
distracted: how would a 50/1.4 with a 2X convertor compare to a
100/2.8? I'm assuming less resolution and contrast, which *could* be an
advantage for portrait work. Hmmm...
AG Schnozz wrote:
>
> > >Low: OM1N, 28/2.8, 50/3.5, 100/2.8.
> > >
> > >High: OM4Ti, 24/2, 35-80/2.8, 135/2.8 Oops, no macro, but a
> > little wider
> > >range.
>
> I started out with an OM-2S, 35/2.8 and 100/2.8. I bought and
> sold a lot of equipment through the years, but these two lenses
> remain my favorites and most used lenses. I'd still consider
> these two as the preferred "low kit" in my book.
>
> I disagree when it comes to buying low and swapping out as time
> and money allows. I'd much rather have a 50/3.5 in my bag than
> the hope of getting a 50/2 next year. I can always swap when
> funds allow, but I can't get the picture if I don't have the
> equipment.
>
> Who knows, you just may not like F2 lenses! One grows very
> attached to the smaller, lighter models. I carry a pretty small
> bag, but stuffed in it are two bodies, a flash, filters,
> extension tubes and 24/2.8, 35/2.8, 50/3.5, 100/2.8, 135/3.5 and
> 200/4 lenses. A 90/2 would take the place of at least two
> lenses or a body or the flash.
>
> I know, some people think my kit is pretty pathetic. Low Rent
> District. Especially since I'm using pretty ancient lenses (all
> are silvernosed, SC jobbies). All have seen better days (glass
> is clean, though) and the OM-2S is looking more metallic. But,
> they are paid for, and still earn me a fair bit of side income.
>
> Don't be afraid of "Low-end" kits. Go for a handful of
> dirt-cheap lenses in multiples of focal lengths and fill the
> gaps later. 28mm lenses (or 35mm) make good first-time
> wide-angles. A 50mm lens is usually pretty cheap and will be a
> money making lens, but typically doesn't inspire creative
> photography too much. A 100mm is an excellent telephoto for the
> beginner, but you may never outgrow it.
>
> AG-Schnozz
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
> http://health.yahoo.com
>
> < 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 >
|