Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] Re: [photos] OT (taken with digital camera)

Subject: [OM] Re: [photos] OT (taken with digital camera)
From: Andrew Fildes <afildes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2005 11:13:15 +1000

On 16/07/2005, at 6:40 PM, Moose wrote:

> OK, read my recent post about Can*n lenses. The 16-35/2.8 isn't as  
> good
> optically as the 17-35/4. I don't know much about the 24-70/2.8, but
> I'll bet it isn't any better optically than the 24-85/3.5-4.5.

Some confusion here. The 16-35mm is better than the earlier 17-35mm -  
both are F2.8. You are thinking about the new 17-40mm f4 which is  
better than the 17-35/2.8 (and about the same price new as a used  
17-35!). It is comparable to the 16-35mm being a touch sharper at the  
wide end and a tad softer at the long end - by an amount you'd never  
notice. Therefore, the choice is paying your money for the extra  
stop, which a pro will do and I could not. I've used the 24-85mm and  
it is very good on 35mm - it was designed for APS (Canon IX bundle)  
and the smaller frame showed up its limitations so I assume that the  
same limitations apply to a digital 1.6 factor image but it is a long  
way ahead of the consumer grade zooms. It is also vewy, vewy slow.  
And I will take that bet.
I am no speed bigot - I had better results on one shoot with the  
50/1.8 than the 50/1.0 possibly because the f1.0 is hard to use well  
but it IS soft wide open - speed isn't everything but a pro will  
sometimes accept a small performance loss for an extra stop or two  
and a better view in the finder.

> The
> 70-200/2.8 is a pretty much universally acclaimed lens, but big and
> expensive. Do you really want to carry such a monster around? The
> 70-200/4 is an excellent lens that's cheaper and samller and lighter.

Yes I do - because I want to use a 1.4X converter with it. And it is  
a joy to use. And there is no IS version of the f4 yet. Oh and  
someone pointed out the 77mm filter size I think, but Canon have  
obligingly used it as a standard on these beasties so my short and  
long zooms use the same pola - how nice. If weight is a factor, I'll  
use a rangefinder instead.
Now I'm just off to visit a bloke who owns the Canon 200mm f1.8 - go  
on, ask me if I'd carry that weight around! Duh!
AndrewF



==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================

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