Wise counsel, Chuck!
I agree that there are non-OM lenses worth looking at, and I can vouch for
several Tamron SP lenses as being well worth what they cost (when new) let
alone their current fetching prices.
If you want to "go wide", take a look at the Tamron SP 35-80/2.8-3.8, for
example, or the Tamron SP 24-48/3.5-4.5.
--
Piers
-----Original Message-----
From: olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Chuck Norcutt
Sent: 16 May 2005 14:21
To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [OM] Re: hypothetical lens choice query
Don't forget that cropping involves the film and scan resolution as well as
the lens contribution. As good as the Zuiko 35-80 is reputed to be, a
severely cropped 80mm image from it could never match the final print
quality of a full frame 75-150 image shot at 150mm. At 80mm the cropped
area from the 35-80 image is little more than 1/4 the size of the 150mm
image. This would be expecting the 35-80, film and scanner combo to produce
double the resolution of the 70-150. It would be like expecting a 16x20 to
look as sharp and crisp as an 8x10. Won't happen.
Assuming you do not have unlimited funds, better you should spend your money
on a greater range of good quality but less expensive lenses than putting
all your eggs in one very expensive basket. If a stable of good Zuikos is
too expensive there's lots of very good, inexpensive stuff out there from
the likes of Tamron, Kiron and others.
Chuck Norcutt
Siddiq wrote:
> let's say I have the ability to get 3600*2400pixel 36bit scans, and am
> looking at some new glass. would be better to get a higher quality
> lens w/ less range (let's suppose 35-80) or get something not quite as
> nice, but better than run-of-the-mill (say 75-150). please note i am
> just using the two mentioned oly lens only for focal length
> demonstration, so actual performance of said lenses is moot). would
> you rather have the wider availability and crop to emulate "longer
> focal length" given the wider lens is also the one with an alphabet
> soup of acronyms and is faster? or get the longer variable aperture
> decent but not world-class lens with more range since you will be able
> to fill the frame completely (but lose on the wide end). the pro lens, if
of course, more expensive. what would you do?
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|