Tom:
It seems that the solution would be a wide to short tele zoom, and a
super-wide. I often wander about with my Kiron 28~105 mounted on the OM-2n,
and a 24/2.8 in my pocket.Your 21/3.5 would be better yet, but the 24 is as
wide a lens as I presently own. The Kiron also has a macro capability.
It's no 90/2, but good enough for flowers.
Bill Stanke
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Scales" <tscales@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; <olympus-digest@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, May 16, 2003 10:18 AM
Subject: Re: [OM] Re: 135/2.8 and 2 lens travel kits
> That's REALLY hard. Two lenses is too limiting. I need three.
>
> One body has to be the 4T.
>
> Three lenses would be:
>
> 90/2
> 35-70/3.5-4.5
> 21/3.5
>
> There are so many good combos though. If I really wanted to lighter
weight
> I'd replace the 90/2 with the 85/2 and auto tubes.
>
> Such a tough question.
>
> Tom
>
>
>
> >
> > Given _lightweight travel_ criteria, i.e. one body, 2 lenses, period.
> > What would you take?
> >
> > Mike
>
>
>
> < 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 >
|