Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] Subject: Re: IMG: Movin' on up

Subject: [OM] Subject: Re: IMG: Movin' on up
From: Nicholas Herndon <nherndon@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 10:41:48 -0600
I need to get another 135/3.5 for my travel kit.  It's a better portrait
lens than the 135/2.8, though the faster version is a better landscape lens
(higher contrast).  It's really great for walking around in urban areas, and
pairs well with the 28/2 as a two lens kit.
The 100/2.8 is a good lens, but generally I don't like the bokeh of that
lens.  The 100/2 is much better in this regard.  Of course, the 100/2 is
also 3 times the size...


>Although I have never even seen or held the smaller 135, in the end of film
days, I found the 135/2.8 to be a  real go-to lens, replacing the 100/2.8 in
my regular kit.



From: Ken Norton [mailto:ken@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2011 3:42 PM
To: Olympus Camera Discussion
Subject: Re: [OM] IMG: Movin' on up



> For some strange reason, I have always preferred the humble 135/3.5 to
> the bigger f/2.8 version. Such
> a special little lens... I suspect my admiration for it is similar to
> Ken Norton's admiration for
> the 100/2.8. Both are such humble, unassuming lenses, but so - what's
> the word... - handy.


Well, when it comes to the 135mm lenses, I do prefer the F2.8 version
to the F3.5 version. Even when stopped down, I find the bokeh of the
2.8 version to be a little more pleasing. The 100/2.8 is anything but
humble in my book. It is by far the most undersung lens in the entire
lineup because of the presence of the 85/2, 90/2 and 100/2. A shame,
really, because it rocks.

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/

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