The 135/2.8 is one lens that I'll never sell as long as I have my OM's. I have
a SC and it's great. Look here for some pix: I had the 135/3.5, but the f/2.8
was better and only marginally larger and heavier.
http://www.skipwilliams.com/gallery/family1/1.htm
http://www.skipwilliams.com/gallery/local1/3.htm
http://www.skipwilliams.com/gallery/local1/4.htm
http://www.skipwilliams.com/gallery/local1/4.htm
The 2X on the 135 works OK, don't expect miracles. It's better than a 2x
enlargement.
The 75-150 is generally an OK lens, but not in the same league as the better
Zuiko primes; certainly nowhere near the 90/2. I sold mine years ago and have
never missed it. The 65-200 gets some nice reviews; no personal experience.
I've settled on the monsterous 80-200/2.8 Tamron SP as my long zoom, which has
spectacular quality and 3-d imaging.
I had a 200/5, but it's VERY slow, although very tiny, hardly bigger than the
135. Quality was very good stopped down to f/8 or so and a very good option if
you feel you'll need the reach, but don't want to carry something larger. The
200/4 is also OK, but I never liked it as much as the 135/2.8. The 300 is a
big lens and not something that I'd travel with unless I had a very specific
need.
I had the 180/2.8 too, but IMO it has too much chromatic aberration for me.
I'd buy the Tamron SP-IF 180/2.5 in a heartbeat over the Zuiko, and it's
usually cheaper. The 180/2 is a super-monster of a lens; not for the
faint-hearted or budget-conscious.
If I was building a travel kit from your base, I'd get a nice 135/2.8, SC or MC
and the 2x. It's a significantly different perspective from the 90, which is
typically how you should select kits. If you don't think the 135 is different
enough, then get the Tamron, but it's significantly heavier. You could also
try the 2x on the 90/2 by borrowing it from someone else before you buy. Then
you'd have a 180/4 at your disposal if you needed it. I don't know if it fits
though.
Skip
>
>75-150/f4: I already have this lens, but I don't really like the results.
>It's a very long time since I've used it, but I've checked with some TOPE
>results and find the pictures rather flat. Having gotten used to the 3D look
>of the 90/f2, I may have gotten spoilt :-) The lens also overlaps with my
>90/f2, and it doesn't extend a great deal beyond it.
>
>180/f2.8: the mailing list archives tell me that this lens suffers from coma.
>Somehow, I'm not looking forward to this lens knowing that. I like doing
>night photography in cities.
>
>180/f2: Hey, I don't want to break my back, nor my bank account :-)
>
>200/f4: The discussion still seems to be open: I've seen rave reviews as well
>as hate-mail about this lens.
>
>200/f5: seems a bit of a weird choice if I would be able to find & afford a
>200/f4.
>
>300mm lenses are quite far away from the 90mm I already have, so I also
>considered this option:
>
>135/f2.8 + 2xA teleconvertor: Gives me 2 focal lengths, going up to 270mm.
>The 2xA is officially compatible with this lens. Gary Reese's lens tests tell
>me the 135/2.8 MC is quite a good lens, and I liked the shots on John Lind's
>homepage. I haven't seen any shot with the 2xA and this lens, but Gary's site
>tells me the results will probably not be spectacular, probably about the same
>as my 75-150.
>
>So here's a string of questions:
>
>1) Any experience with the 135/f2.8 ? Is my impression about right ?
>2) Any experience with this lens and the 2xA TC ? Pictures I can take a look
>at ?
>3) I've found a thread about the 90/2.0 and the 2xA TC. Officially, these
>don't go together, but I got the impression some people got it working. If it
>involves disassembling my 90mm, I won't do it !
>4) Other options I should consider ?
>5) Tripod work with this setup: from the eSIF, I learn that only lenses of
>300mm and up have a tripod mount. Hints ? I've got a decent Gitzo.
>6) Photography from a train or a ferry. I'm planning on taking the infamous
>Moscow-Beijing train, as well as a 2-day ferry from China to Japan. If I'm
>lucky, I can take some pictures with the horizon and infinity being sharp, and
>I don't care if there's motion blur in the foreground (it's a moving vehicle
>!) How can I best achieve this ? Can a tripod work from a train, or would
>that just pass through all little humps to my camera ? From a ferry, I guess
>a short shutter speed is the only option ?
>
>Film I plan to take: SensiaII 100 (maybe Provia), and Portra800 in a small
>point&shoot (for fun pictures, fixed 28mm/3.5).
>
>
>Thanks for all your help !
>
>Peter.
>
>
>
>< 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 >
< 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 >
|