Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] Happy ...

Subject: Re: [OM] Happy ...
From: Joel Wilcox <jfwilcox@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 09:29:56 -0500
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012, at 08:44 PM, Moose wrote:
> On 4/10/2012 5:51 PM, Joel Wilcox wrote:
> > ... By now it will be clear that I am looking for an AF 28-105 just so the 
> > 5D doesn't forget how to do AF. 
> 
> That is quite a different lens from the 35-105/2.8.
> 
> > My local camera store has a couple Tammy 28-75/2.8, which would be OK, but 
> > those are selling for about $350 and the 
> > 28-105 for EOS usually goes for about the same. The disadvantage is that 
> > the 28-105 is a much heavier lens, huge front 
> > element. 
> 
> Yup, much bigger and heavier than the 35-105. I believe Walt had a fair
> bit to say about his, should you care to dip 
> into the archives. Too big and heavy for what it does for my taste. 

Speed for the buck is the attraction.  If I could snipe one for about
$200, I'd like to try it out.

> In MF
> days, I went to slower for longer zoom range, 
> Tokina AT-X 35-200/3.5-4.5 and Kiron 28-210/4-5.6, 1:4, among some others
> that didn't work as well as those for me.

Definitely good value. I actually think the Zuiko 85-250/5 is a very
cool lens, but when I got an SP 80-200/2.8, it was hard to go back,
despite the weight of that thing.  Everything I shoot on the 5D is
pretty fast.  I have a little cheapie Tamron 28-80/3.5-5.6.  It's
terrific for what it cost, but I never use it.  Constant f2.8 in 28-105
would be ideal.

I should probably just get a cheap but good 70-200/3.5 of some kind and
call it good.  But ... yawn ...  I'm in Ken-mode:  What is the best
thing for me to use that I will never actually buy?

> The Tammy 28-300/3.5-6.3 takes care of the whole range. Sounds a bit slow
> at the long end, but I've taken hundreds, 
> likely thousands, of at least technically successful shots at 300 mm, and
> it's as fast or faster at 200 than the 28-200. 
> Exceptional C-U performance at the long end. The ordinary version is
> amazingly small and light. My copy of the VC 
> version is slightly sharper at the long end, but the AF may be slightly
> less reliable at the long end than my non-VC one.
> 
> Focus speed/noise has been fine with me for well over 10,000 shots, but
> not a patch on Canon's own Ultrasonic focus 
> lenses, most of which have full time MF availability without switching.

This is too rational.  I'm seriously disturbed.  Stop it.

Joel W.

-- 
http://www.fastmail.fm - Access your email from home and the web

-- 
_________________________________________________________________
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