Indeed. I'm used to using a Canon 70-200/2.8 at that length and there
is a tendency to compare - you just can't avoid it. And this is a
much cheaper and more ambitious lens.
I know that the body is more important these days because it has now
incorporated all those preferences that people used to express for
different films. The Fuji DSLR's for instance are much favoured by
wedding photographers I understand, for the image tonality they
produce. The rest of us might not be prepared to accept the other
aspects of their design to get that advantage. Even so, I am
astonished how much reviewing of DSLRs pays almost no attention to
the lens being used. In testing something like the E-330, my
preference would be for the 50/2 macro on it as I would be reasonably
assured that I had a lens that exceeds the abilities of the sensor.
However, Olympus Australia obdurately supplies a kit lens of the
'Standard' level. My cousin is assessing a Canon 5D at present for an
article and Canon with their usual common sense approach to
professional support supplied a 16-35mm L lens with it - their offer,
not his request.
Anyone who bought an E3(?) and put anything less than the 14-54mm on
it has only bought half the package.
AndrewF
On 06/02/2006, at 5:54 AM, Winsor Crosby wrote:
> Then again there has been lots of discussion of high MP cameras
> showing all the flaws of lenses people had been perfectly happy with.
> Since this is a new lens though you would not think that was the
> case. That is one thing to consider when hoping for a 10 or 12 MP E-1
> successor. You will be stuck with buying only the better Oly lenses.
> The consumer kit lens will not be an option unless you are just
> willing to settle for smaller images with it or only using it at its
> opitimum settings.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|