I can use both my 135/3.5 and 100/2.8 wide open. Can't say that for my
(old) 50/1.4 SC, 50/3.5 macro, 28/3.5, 28/2, or 200/4.
For the concert stuff I like to do, I wanted something around 85/90. I
don't have any experience with the 85. I was thinking about buying one
until I found the legendary Series1 90mm f/2.5 macro with 1:1 tube for 1/2
the money.
On the other hand, I don't know if the 90 and 100 are different enough to
keep both. I sure love to use that 100 so I may keep it cause it handles so
nicely. I love the fit and finish of my Zuikos but the Series1 doesn't
focus "backwards" so......... We'll see........
Lama
From: "Carlos J. Santisteban Salinas" <cjss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> I like my E.Zuiko 135/3.5 _very_ much; however, I think it's my only Zuiko
> SC which is seriously flare-prone. I'm afraid that there was _no_
> multicoated version of this lens -- I've seen a 'Zuiko' one with
> reflections of _exactly_ the same colours. I've got also an MC 135/2.8,
> which performs great, but feels _much_ bigger and heavier than the 3.5.
>
> So I was thinking about an even smaller 100/2.8 (maybe MC). How does it
> compare against the 135?
>
> On the other hand, I like my silvernose 85/2 a lot. Does it make sense to
> get the 100/2.8 owning already an 85/2? The real-zuikoholic answer:
> 'SURE!!!' :-)
< 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 >
|