OK, I will toss out a few words. In the days of 4/3, before it got
upstaged by m4/3, Fuji, etc., Oly put forth a macro for the masses, a ZD
35/3.5 that sold for under $200US. After reading about it, I decided it
would make a fine companion for my 14-54, because AF is nice when
cataracts are developing. Despite the low price, the optics turned out
quite good, and I have enjoyed using it, until yesterday.
It was noted in the early reviews that this lens would hunt when trying
to AF at close distances. I accepted that and took it into account.
But, while shooting rose closeups yesterday, it would go all the way out
to about 1:1, and stay there until I turned the power off. After
several attempts, with no success, I tried the pencil eraser contact
cleaning trick, but this hardly made a difference. When I put the 14-54
on the same camera, AF is fine, which, to me, says that the lens has a
problem.
Any suggestions? Or similar experiences?
Jim Nichols
Tullahoma, TN USA
On 9/14/2013 11:03 PM, Moose wrote:
> That's one of the big differences between the digital age and film on this
> list - we hardly speak about lenses.
>
> Remember when threads about particular lenses and how they compare to other
> lenses would go on hot and heavy for days -
> or weeks?
>
> An announcement of a new Zuiko macro lens would elicit a flurry of posts. Oly
> announced the µ4/3 60/2.8, stating that it
> is as good as the ZD 50/2. I don't recall it even being mentioned here. I
> only became aware of it wandering about the web.
>
> Anybody know about its unique hood?
>
> I post an image from it, with 100% crop, and comparisons with other M.Z
> lenses, and get one response (Thanks, Chuck!):
>
> On 9/13/2013 5:04 PM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
>> All are very nice within their size domain.
> That's it? That's all anyone has to say about a new(ish) lens?
>
> I'm not complaining, just curious. Might it be that contemporary 4/3 and µ4/3
> lenses have reached a point of sufficiency
> such that differences don't matter much, to most of us, most of the time?
> Have all our eyes grown so old that most of us
> can't see the difference any more? :-(
>
> AG is, of course, still singing the praises of certain OM lenses, Mike weighs
> in with images form Bigfoot and its kin
> and Moose mind bending erudite contributions on DOF, motion blur, etc.
>
> And Joel had his recent Summer fling with a strange girl, the ZD 18-180,
> before abandoning her.
>
> But really not that much lens talk.
>
> Just Sayin' Moose
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|