I do think that a 28-50-135 is the best all around kit. Very versatile
and not too heavy, although I did recommend to a friend recently the
28-50-100 as I think the 135 may have been a bit too long for him.
I certainly don't want this to become a bragging competition. The only
reason I have any of the "fancy" glass is through a small arch. photo.
business that usually only pays for the equipment, and some of the grad
school bills. The 18 is invaluable for interiors and is a good
complement to the 24 shift.
If I had all the money in the world, I would use the 21/2, 50/2, and
100/2 as my kit, but based on size, weight, and ergonomics I mostly use
a 85/2 and OM-1n. The 28/2 (and most recently the 50/3.5) have been
used to complement this minimalist kit. I "borrow" the 18 occasionally
from the arch. stuff, and recently sold a 21/3.5 as it did not get used
enough (which I maybe now regret). This past w/e I used the 18/3.5
quite a bit as I lent the 28/2 to a friend. I was amazed with the DOF,
and if things turn out as good as they looked in the camera, I will
really have a reason to regret letting the 21/3.5 go.
So, I guess what it all comes down to is that your "kit" will depend on
what you are shooting and what you are comfortable with. This rarely
has anything to do with actual FOV numbers, and more with what your eye
sees.
Bob Gries
< 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 >
|