In a message dated 9/9/2002 Daniel J. Mitchell writes:
<< I'm sure I should know this one already from reading the list, but every
so
often I'll see someone's photos and wonder -- what's the advantage of the
'big glass' lenses again? >>
Speed, sharpness, and bokeh. My "money lens" is what I call it. Results from
it are amazing and speak for themselves.
<< I see why a 350/2.8 is so expensive, certainly, but given that most of
the
shots taken with them seem to be at f/8 or f/11, is it really worth the
money? >>
They do? In all the thousands of frames I have now shot through my 350/2.8
very few were at f8 or f11. The vast majority are at f2.8 or f4 (often with
the Zuiko 1.4XA which adds a stop also BTW). Seldom am I stopped down more
than f5.6.
<< You gain ease of focusing because the DOF is smaller there, and a
brighter viewfinder, but that seems fairly small improvements for the many
many thousands more dollars they cost. >>
When using a 2 series screen, the focus can not be described. It must be
experienced to appreciate. The difference is not "fairly small" at all. Vast
would better describe.
<< Is there other things you gain that I'm not thinking of -- are the images
from a 350/2.8 at f8 better than those
from a 300/4.5 at f8? >>
Sure, speed. The ability to freeze moments in time with ultra-fine grain
(read slow ISO speed) films in almost all light conditions. Is the 350/2.8
any sharper than a 300/4.5 at f8? Perhaps not. I don't know since I never
made the comparison. Could I accomplish the same results with a Zuiko
300/4.5? Absolutely not. I would have bought a Tamron 300/2.8 or 400/4 had I
not wound up with the big white one.
It really depends on the application, but in general, the big fast ones tend
to be the best performers as well.
Mike Veglia
Motor Sport Visions Photography
http://www.motorsportvisions.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 >
|