Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] Re: Zuiko 35~105/3.5-4.5

Subject: [OM] Re: Zuiko 35~105/3.5-4.5
From: Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:38:51 -0800
johan.malmstrom@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

>Do you have it?
>
Yes

>Do you like?
>
Yes

>What is good for?
>
As others have said, a great walking around/general purpose lens, but it 
depends somewhat on what you want/need. In the never ending search for 
the perfect single do it all zoom, I've got a lot of mid range zooms. 
The basic truth is that there is (price aside) a continuous trade-off of 
size and weight vs. function. The 35-105/3.5-4.5 is a nice middle 
ground. Very small and light for it's speed and range and it just looks 
great on a black OM. A nice optical performer too. On the other hand, 
105mm is a little short for me and 35mm could be too long for those who 
consider that a normal lens focal length, so it depends a lot on 
individual taste. Another taste issue is the close focus. Piers thinks 
it's great. I think it is pretty good, but not great. It goes to 1:5, 
but only at 35mm, so the working distance at is pretty short.

Some other choices:

Size: 35-70/3.5-4.5. Amazingly diminutive and light. Optically good, but 
limited zoom range. Perfect on an OMPC for casual "maybe I'll take pics 
and maybe not" kind of days. CF to 1:6

Speed: My choice is the Tamron asp 35-105/2.8, both for reach and price 
over the 35-80/2.8. Both excellent optically and with both with crummy 
CF. For those with a wider normal focal length preference, the Tokina 
28-40/2.8.

Reach: There are a whole lot of lenses in the 28/50-135/200mm range with 
a bewildering set of trade-offs. I go back and forth between Tokina AT-X 
28-200/3.5-4.5, Kiron 35-135/3.5-4.5, both with 1:4 at 35mm and Tamron 
IF Asph 28-200/3.8-5.6, slow long end, poorer CF @ 1:6, but small and 
light with 7x zoom range (actually lighter, and the same length at 35mm, 
as the 35-105/3.5-4.5, but fatter). I just got a Tokina SZ-X 
35-200/3.5-5.6. Not an AT-X, but uses SD glass, is a bit smaller and 
lighter than the AT-X and does its 'macro' to 1:4 at the 200mm end for a 
HUGE difference from the others for working distance. No real experience 
with it yet.

Macro: None of the true mid range zooms do real macro. The Tokina 
50-250/4-5.6, at 1:1.4 and Tamron 60-300/3.8-5.4, at 1:1.6 go really 
close. They aren't true flat-field, but pretty good, and work very well 
for typical natural subjects where only the center is in focus for DOF 
reasons anyway.

>And how much would you pay for it?
>
Well, I paid $209 for a mint or mint- with hood, instructions, pouch, 
box, packing, full package like new.

Moose babbling on


The olympus mailinglist olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: mailto:olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe

To contact the list admins: mailto:olympusadmins@xxxxxxxxxx?subject="Olympus 
List Problem"

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