Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] 200 or 300mm Zuiko prime?

Subject: Re: [OM] 200 or 300mm Zuiko prime?
From: Skip Williams <om@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 20:55:48 -0500
I had a 180/2.8 for many years that I shot basketball and portraits with.  It's 
a great lens, but all the images have CA issues, especially in the corners.  
Ask C.H. Ling, he uses it quite a bit, and it takes great images, especially in 
his hands.  But I belive that I remember him also remarking that the photos are 
soft in the corners with color fringing.

This is the result of Olympus not using the expensive ED glass for these 
lenses.  Nikon recognized the shortfall and offered both ED and non-ED versions 
of it's vaunted 180/2.8.  The ED images have a significant more crispness to 
them, IME.

The Tamron 180/2.5, with it's ED glass, is similar.  However, I've heard of at 
least three instances where the focusing has gone off on those lenses from 
different sources, which may be an aberration.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Please reply to [skipwilliams at pobox.com]
Direct responses to the email address on the header may get lost
----------------------------------------------------------------->
>Subject: Re: [OM] 200 or 300mm Zuiko prime?
>   From: Fernando Gonzalez Gentile <fgnzalez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>   Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 16:56:53 -0300
>     To: <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>on 11/08/2003 11:51, Skip Williams at om@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
>> I wouldn't buy the 180/2.8, personally, with it's chromatic aberration.
>Good thing one never stops learning things. Now I feel lucky because when
>decided to buy my /4, the 180/2.8 didn't exist. When first noticed it, I
>thought I should have waited until... Never used one, neither even seen one.
>When subscribed to this list some months ago, noone even talked about it.
>Where or how did you get that chomatic aberration info?
>
>Regards,
>
>Fernando.
>
>PS: I recognize I exagerated a bit about sharpness of the 200/4 + 2X-A
>combination... some seagull eye was not as round as it should have been,
>tripod mounted at 1/250 f8 (16)
>
>
>< 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 >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz