On Mon, 27 Jan 2003 12:13:35 -0800
"George M. Anderson" <george@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Ahhh, deep breath.
>
> My input - gotta admit, my Zuikos are mainly sitting around
> collecting dust due to not much opportunity to photograph and due
> to my interests right now being using 4x5s for big landscape work
> and using my 645 with Agfa Scala for some off-beat unusual work I'm
> trying to do.
Larger formats rulez...I have an ongoing project of trying to build a
4x5 myself, however it is a long task.
I have an old Mamiya 645 for MF stuff. Despite having had it for many
yearsI still cannot get over how stunning 645 slides look, compared
to 35mm.
I wonder....is Velvia available in 4x5, and how the heck to project
something that big...:)
>
> That said, a year ago or so I got some great shots in Yosemite of
> Half Dome and full moon and Sunset on Horsetail Falls, all with
> Zuikos - 180/2, 350/2.8 and the 1.4 and 2x. Beautiful Velvia
> slides resulted. Hopefully, I'll get a chance to print some soon.
>
Hey, I may get around to Yosemite this spring. I am hoping for good
weather, and an opportunity to use the 300/4.5. Yeah, less impressive
than the 180 and the 350, but 300/4.5 is what I have....
> More to the point, though, I've been wanting to thin out the Zuikos
> and get rid of some overlap for a couple of years. But I just
> haven't been able to bring myself to do it. Some thinking:
>
> Lenses I use the most:
> Same as next list with addition of 35-80/2.8 and 90/2 macro
>
> ***
> Lenses I doubt I'll ever sell: (far too expensive to do this kind
> of work in larger formats. Plus, these are world class lenses)
> 16/3.5
> 50/2 macro
> 180/2
> 1.4x
> 350/2.8 (BUT - Here's a month's living expenses!)
>
Hehe...the only one from that list which I actually have is the 1.4x
- the rest is way out of my league, I am afraid.
> ***
> Lenses I thought I'd never sell until recently:
> 28-48/4 (great little lens, but I got a 28/2, the 35-80 zoom and
> several 50s)
I have grown to keep the 28-48 on an OM1 body.....fits right into an
Everready case, and is now my std. "walking in the city" setup.
Mostly, something wide is needed (I live in Paris - small streets and
all), and a zoom is nice. I would not part with mine, although its
optical properties may not be on par with the prime wides.
> 35-80/2.8 (fantastic lens, right down to wide open. But I could
> use the$$$s.)
> 50/1.2 (after all I've got the 50/2. But this lens is incredibly
> sharp ...) 80, 90 or 135 macro (how can I justify keeping all of
> these? Can anyone HELP ME?)
>
Can't help you there. Many people tell me that the 35-80 is the best
thing since sliced bread, however I do not have it. The 35-70/3.6 is
what I have that comes closest, and I honestly find that I use that
less than I thought I would. Not because it is bad, but just
because...well, I have no idea :) I had two, got rid of one recently.
Thinking if I should keep the remaining or let it go too. After all,
I also have the 35-105, which I use more since it is an one-touch
zoom...yeah, I know, I am a creature of habit, and two rings to turn
really confuse me :)
> ***
> Others I have a hard time justifying keeping all of due to overlap:
> 24/2.8
> 28/2
> 135/2.8
>
The 135/2.8 is a stunning lens, I think. I really like what I get
from it. I use it mostly for bw, and I find it really easy to use.
And, btw., I like the bokkeh of my sample of that particular lens :)
> ***
> Lenses I've sold and wish I hadn't:
> 21/3.5
> 100/2
>
> ***
> Lenses I'd like to buy even now:
> 18/3.5 OR 21/3.5 MC
>
> I know, nice problems to have? But I've been an Olympus user since
> the late 70's so I've had plenty of chance to collect stuff.
>
> So, here I sit, trying to pick the next lens on the chopping block.
> 28-48/4?; 24/2.8; 135/2.8?
> Any help out there?
Well, if I was to part with one of the above, it would be the 24/2.8.
I use all three of these lenses, however the 28-48 and the 135/2.8
see a lot more action than the 24/2.8, so that would be the way it
had to go.
Here is an interresting question, George (and others): imagine that
you could keep only ONE lens, and that it had to be a PRIME (i.e. no
zooms). What would that lens be?
For me, I would pick either the 55/1.2 or the 135/2,8 - with a strong
preference for the 55/1.2. The 55/1.2 is truely amazing, and I use
that probably more than any other lens I ever owned (for the OMs,
that is).
--thomas
< 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 >
|