Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] comparison: Olympus 100/2.8 and Tamron 90/2.5

Subject: Re: [OM] comparison: Olympus 100/2.8 and Tamron 90/2.5
From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" <lamadoo@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 20:24:42 -0500
Cc: <james_olson@xxxxxxxxxxx>
I like your thinking, James.  As a matter of fact, I recently bought a
similar lens, the Vivitar Series1 90mm f/2.5 macro with a 1:1 adapter, to
replace my Zuiko 100mm f/2.8.  I gave away (!) my Zuiko 50/3.5 macro because
there's no working distance.

My thinking was that for table top photography (for ebay ads and puppies) I
need something that brings me much closer than the Zuiko 100 /2.8.  I have
been using a Kiron zoom at 200mm that brings me to 1:4 but having something
around 90mm that gets a little closer was a prime consideration.  Pun
intended.

The Series1, at 90mm, also gives better steps between the 50 and 135 lenses
I already have.  For the concert stuff I love to shoot and on my budget, I
have to have glass that is no slower than f/3.5, sharp wide open and CHEAP.
The Kiron 80-200 f/4 is just barely not good enough.

I really like the Series1 90mm macro as a general purpose short-tele.  This
lens is so sharp it's amazing.  The first time I used it, I noticed that
when I focused it on a pipe, from about 5 feet away, I could clearly see
that the center of the pipe (closest to me) was in focus but the right side
edge (the farthest visible side) was not.  The difference was only about 1".
The image in the viewfinder is.... crystalline it's so sharp.  The Series1
focuses in the same direction as the Zuikos.

BTW, I disagree with those who say that some lenses are "hard to focus".  I
assert that some lenses are such dogs that they can't be brought into sharp
focus because they are incapable of "sharpness".  Maybe dogs should be
focused while stopped down with the preview button to f8?  That doesn't
sound like fun to me and is NOT why I spent all of this money!

While the 100mm f/2.8 Zuiko was my favorite lens, I'm not looking back.
That's why it's up on ebay right now, with correct hard case, and correct
rubber hood as Item # 3000016804 .  Just thought I'd sneak that in but I'm
not helping to generate interest with this post, that's for sure!!

Lama

PS, I think someone recently said that the Tamron teleconverters are a pain
to use as intended with Tamron teles cause you have to move the awkward
mount from the lens to the converter.  Does the Tamron macro have a 1:1
adapter and does it have a similar arrangement?  Ask now or forever hold
your peace.  :)

----- Original Message -----
From: "james olson" <james_olson@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> I currently own the Olympus 100/2.8, but I've been looking at the Tamron
> 90/2.5 for standard shooting and macro work.  It seems like a good way to
> have two lenses in one. Does anyone on the list have actual experience
with
> the lens as a standard lens?  <edit>
> I'm quite interested in acquiring one, but maybe it's redundant with a
> 100/2.8?  (And I have the 50/3.5 Olympus Macro.)


< 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