Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] What lenses would you guys recommend?

Subject: Re: [OM] What lenses would you guys recommend?
From: Jim Brokaw <jbrokaw@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2002 00:39:10 -0700
on 9/20/02 10:45 PM, Albert at olympus@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

> I have a 28mm/f2.8, 50mm/f1.8, and 90mm/f2.5.
> 
> If I were to buy another lens, what length lens would you guys recommend?
> 
> Albert

Which do you like better -- wider or longer? Its really a matter of personal
preference.

If you're looking longer and not hung up on Zuiko, an 80-200 zoom of some
reputable manufacture, i.e. Tamron/Tokina/Vivitar/Kiron etc. would get you
in that direction... for not much expense. Just from the numbers it looks
like the 90/2.5 is a macro lens of some brand, not Zuiko. In Zuikos to go
longer you could get a 135/3.5 or 135/2.8, get the 75-150/4.0 (an underrated
lens IMO) or the 65-200/4.0, or the 180/2.8 or 200/4.0. I'd watch out for
too big a jump from the 90... That's why an 80-200 zoom would be a good
first choice, lots of flexibility. If you have a specialized subject in mind
that you enjoy, like wildlife, birds, motorsports, surfing, etc. then maybe
a 300mm would be a good choice. The Zuiko 300/4.5 is an outstanding lens for
the cost, but also consider mirror lenses for a real long reach without too
much $ outlay. With an OM-2 or newer OM, you get continuously variable
shutter speeds on auto, which helps with exposures with fixed-aperture
mirror lenses. With fast film the 300mm -can- be hand-held (carefully, fast
shutter speeds only) but anything longer pretty much requires a monopod or
tripod, figure that into you outlay and lug-around load...

If you're looking for shorter, you need to figure out just how 'wide' you
need to get... I consider 24mm the beginning of truly wide-angle vision;
while 21mm and shorter are 'ultra-wide'. Truly ultra-wide lenses tend to be
fairly specialized and are harder to 'visualize with' than the 24mm focal
length. It takes some learning to see how they're going to take in the sweep
that they do... In 24mm, the Zuiko 24/2.8 is a beautiful lens (one of the
original three I got with my first OM-1). But don't handle a 24/2.0 first...
or you'll be hooked even though its twice as expensive (or more). The Zuiko
21/3.5 is another great lens, very small, but getting a bit fiddly in
composition... The Zuiko 18/3.5 is outstanding, but you'll need to stand out
at the stoplight with a cardboard sign for a long while to pay for it. There
was a discussion here recently of the several 18(19)-28(35) zooms available
from third-party makers (Samyang, Phoenix/Vivitar), as well as some
third-party fixed focal lengths available (Tamron 17/3.5, etc...) The zooms
would be a way to experiment without tying up too much cash until you figure
out what 'wideness' you need to reach. I have an 18-28/4.0-4.5 Samyang and
it seems to take pretty good pictures. I don't think its as rectilinear as
my Zuiko 18/3.5 but it was one-fifth (!) the cost...
-- 

Jim Brokaw
OM-1's, -2's, -4's, (no -3's yet) and no OM-oney... 


< 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