Wrote Joel:
>My original 50mm prime was ruined in a flood about 5 years ago. As I had the
>Zuiko 35-70 F3.5-4.5, I survived. Now I'd like to invest in some primes and
>wondered if others thought I should resist the incredible bargains on the
>1.8s and go for a good 1.4, or is it not really worth the extra dough? From
>the FAQ it seems that the 1.8s are a trifle more variable.
The 1.8 was always a highly regarded lens, even before MC-coating. A late
issue 1.8 (MC, without the chrome edge on the front ring) is a lovely optic.
All the 1.4 lenses I have tried have been way too flarey for my taste, though
not quite as bad as a 1.2 -- but admittedly, these improved, especially after
the changeover from 55 to 50 mm focal length.
Vänliga hälsningar/Best regards
Lars Bergquist
Välkommen till/Welcome to ...
<http://www.bahnhof.se/~timberwolf/>
############################################################
| This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List
| To receive the Digest version mailto:listserv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| with "subscribe olympus-digest" in the message body.
| To unsubscribe from the current list mailto:listserv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| with "unsubscribe olympus" in the body.
| For questions mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html
############################################################
|