>
> There are some OM guys who stick entirely with the 2.8 lenses (or 49mm
> lenses if you want to think of it that way -- though that includes the
> 85 and 28/2) because the size of the lenses relative to the bodies is
> a better match. I do see the point, though if I ever held that view I
> am so long fallen that I don't recall.
>
I'm typically "guilty as charged" in that concept. I do believe that the
49mm lenses (filter ring size) are visually the most pleasing on the OM
bodies. Especially the, ahem, silver-nosed ones. This is obviously
personal preference, but they have style. The black-nosed variety lacks the
chrome on both the front of the filter-ring, but on the edges of the
aperture ring. But, alas, that has nothing to do with performance, does it?
When the OM body is mated to a motordrive and big-honkin flash, then the
49mm lenses are just a bit too undersized. The 35-80/2.8, which is a bit
uncomfortable to use on an otherwise naked OM body, is a perfect match to a
uber-OM setup.
However, it does get heavy. An OM-4T, 35-80/2.8, MD2 and T45 flash is one
substantial kit. There is nothing svelte about it.
AG
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|