Going the Pentax route, I've gone with 43/1.9 and 40/2.8 -- the latter
being a pancake.....and is nice and slim. Never had a Zuiko 40/2, so
the second-best had to be another 40mm pancake.
I quite like the focal lenght, I have to say.
--thomas
On 1 Jun 2005, at 12:47, Earl Dunbar wrote:
>
> Yeah well, I still like 40-42mm. And I like the ones on my SPs just
> fine, so THERE!
>
> I suspect if I ever go the full RF route, it will be 28mm, 40mm, 90mm.
>
> Earl
>
> Moose wrote:
>
>> Earl Dunbar wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> If I could afford the Zuiko OM pancake, I'd have at least one. If
>>> Maitani were still at the helm, I'd be emailing him every day for a
>>> 40/f1.2. I'm sure no one else at Olympus today would listen.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> One of the reasons for the 40/2 pancake lenses, by at least Oly and
>> Nik*n, is that 40mm is the shortest fl that can be made in a "normal"
>> symetrical formula and still not interfere with the SLR mirror. That
>> made it a natural for the most compact possible lens. Since the only
>> real advantage of the 40mm over a 50mm, from a marketing perspective
>> (and as has been pointed out, the 40/2 was a marketplace failure), was
>> it's size, it made no sense to design a big, fast one.
>>
>> The real question was why they didn't design really fast 35mm and/or
>> 80-100mm lenses. A 35/1.2 or 85/1.4 makes more sense in the market
>> than
>> a 40/1.2. Yes, I know about the CV 40/1.2. See my rant about Agfa and
>> Kodak for why this is a whole different kettle of developer than Oly
>> in
>> the OM heyday.
>>
>> Moose
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|