I handled one of these speed demons once upon a time. I remember being
impressed with the exceptional brightness of the viewfinder image. And the
candlelight scenes one can take with it are neat if that is the sort of
thing you like to shoot. It is also a tad bulky and heavy. I remember the
55 f/1.2 and 50mm f/2 macro having the same heft to them. On looking up the
vital statistics, the f/1.2 is 310g, compared to 320g for the macro - pretty
close - compared to 230g and 170g for the f/1.4 and f/1.8 versions
respectively. Awfully long way to say its heavy. But hey! f/1.2 is neat,
it is an uncommon lens for sure and if its worth an OM-1 to you, go for it
and don't look back.
John P
______________________________________
there is no "never" - just long periods of "not yet".
Bradley Mabb <svtbrad@xxxxxxxxxx> pondered:
>
> Hi Gang,
>
> I've been pondering this one all week. A friend of mine that does
>astrophotography
> needed another OM-1 (his cat got hold of the strap on his last and
>brought it to it's
> death). He had a Zuiko 55mm f1.2 he never uses and asked if I'd trade.
>On one hand,
> I love my OM-1's and didn't want to part with my good one (other one
has
>problems-
> now a fishing camera). But this is the FIRST 55 f1.2 I've seen, and
>always liked
> the idea of having Oly's fastest. With the knowledge that OM-1's are
>still fairly
> common (by far in comparision to the 55), I decided to go for it.
Beyond
>a couple
> small but nasty scratches in the filter and nameplate rings where
>someone tried
> to open it, it's in perfect condition. Except for the fact that it's a
>different
> filter size, anyone have any pros or con comments on this lens?
>
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|