On Wed, 21 Apr 1999 17:20:23 +0200 (MET DST), Sean Mattingly
<matting@xxxxxxxxxxxx> jammed all night, and by sunrise was overheard
remarking:
> I previously owned an OM-2S with a Vivitar 35-210(?) lens, but it
> was stolen out of my parent's car back in high school...
Ouch! At least insurance covered it. In early '84, I was rennovating a
house owned by my Mom's business, and living their. When "Sheldon", the
local crook, broke in an swiped many things, including my original OM-1,
the insurance company refused to cover any of the stuff, not even my
tools. Fortunately, at least, he missed all the lenses and the motor
drive in the closet.
> I often end up using a "snappy-cam" on my more active vacation-type
> trips (skiing, rock climbing, etc) because I'm afraid of
> loosing/damaging my 4T and the difference in picture quality still
> astounds me. You get what you pay for...
Yup. I used to do that; between the year I lost the OM-1 and the year I
bought my OM-4, I picked up an XA2, figuring it would still be useful for
this kind of stuff once I got a new OM. But it's usually kind of
frustrating. Ultimately, I gave the XA2 to my wife and picked up a few
used OM bodies (OM-G, OM-PC) for backup or risks. However, you don't
realize how spoiled you are with the OM1..4 until you're using something
else. The OM-G is a fine camera, but it lacks refinement. I always wonder
if there might be something wrong when I snap a shot. There never is,
that's just not the sound of an OM1/4 shutter. So I finally picked up a
used OM-1, used, a fairly awesome deal too. That's now my backup, but the
others are still useful for dangerous missions. You can pick up an OM-G
cheap; they're often sold for less than OM-10s, for a reason I'll never
understand, and do offer full manual settings as well as the typical
aperature priority (no OTF, of course).
> Then I saw the prices. Ouch. I could go for a Vivitar that has
> more zoom range for half the price. So the question is, "Are the Zuikos
> worth the extra money?"
Maybe. I have three zooms:
Zuiko 100mm-200mm f5
Vivitar 28mm-80mm f3.5-f4.5
Tokina 28mm-200mm f3.5-f5.3
The Zuiko is by far the sharpest, the Tokina the least sharp. Yet you
can't beat the 7:1 ratio in some situations. Not a small lens, but it's
often on a second body if not my prime.
I picked up the Vivitar with my OM-G and a Vivitar flash, used. It's not
a bad lens, but you won't mistake the results for Zuiko if you're looking
very closely. I would probably use this one much more were it compact,
but it's only about an inch shorter than the Tokina, so it'll eventually
get replaced with the tiny Zuiko 35mm-70mm at some point.
> anyway. :) Are there places out there on the web or elsewhere that I
> can look at the same picture taken with a non-Zuiko and a Zuiko lens
> side-by-side?
If you're buying new, it shouldn't be a problem to make a test chart of
some kind, take some reference shots with your favorite lens, then take
the chart and a body into the camera store and try a few lenses on for
size. This is the kind of thing that used to go all the time in "real"
camera stores; it might annoy the kid at the local mall store (as if you
could find OM-mount lenses there anyway), otherwise no problem.
--
Dave Haynie | V.P. Technology, Met@box AG | http://www.metabox.de
Be Dev #2024 | NB851 Powered! | Amiga 2000, 3000, 4000, PIOS One
< 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 >
|