Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] Re: ZD 18-180 [was e-330, is this what we have been waiting for fro

Subject: [OM] Re: ZD 18-180 [was e-330, is this what we have been waiting for from]
From: Winsor Crosby <wincros@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 05 Feb 2006 01:00:06 -0800
I have always been very suspicious, initially of zoom lenses in  
general, and then long zooms. I don't know what the problem was with  
that particular lens or shooting situation, but I have looked at  
enough 100 percent resolution images from that particular model that  
look sharp at any focal length as to consider buying it as a travel  
lens when I have to fly. Its only faults appear to be a little  
excessive barrel distortion at the widest and a little softness at  
the very tips of the corners at some focal length. Softness above 120  
does not seem to be a problem for for that lens if you judge by the  
images or the comments on the Nikon forum at dpreview. And they are a  
cantankerous bunch.  Like you, I thought it was a sop to people used  
to digicams with super zooms, but it appears to be a very nice lens.  
Actually it is not large at all. It weighs one ounce more than the OM  
200/4 and is 1.2 inches shorter than the 200/4. Oh, and faster at the  
wide end.  I find that pretty amazing.

I agree with Moose too that in the past speed in the lens was more  
necessary in the past when you were limited by the speed of the film  
you had in the camera or or the quality of the high ISO film which  
you could buy. But the camera is part of the equation now. Who cares  
whether the extra 1 to 2 F stops of exposure are obtained with the  
lens or shooting at a higher ISO, at least in most cases?

I am using a 17-55/2.8 zoom  and still getting used to its size and  
weight. Faster lenses are big and heavy. That is not even 4X and is  
only about a stop faster. But the range you mention is the one I  
would have chosen myself except maybe a tad wider 17-120 and maybe  
3.5 to 4.5 to keep it small.



Winsor
Long Beach, California, USA




On Feb 4, 2006, at 10:18 PM, Andrew Fildes wrote:

> The Nikon 18-200mm VR that started this is very good in the wide to
> moderate tele range, say 18-120mm. Then it's downhill. So, to me  it
> would be more sensible to make a shorter 6X zoom and make it faster.
> I'm fairly sure that it would cover your needs for relationships in
> beautiful areas. :)


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

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