Hello Leopoldo,
the 180 is great to work with, but the results are poor: when there is a high
contrast on a photo (eg a bright background) you will see a blue coma around
the edges of the bright part of the picture (eg the mountaintop). The 180 is
the only Zuiko I ever sold, I like my 85-250 much better (it's slower, but the
quality of the pictures is better). If you do not use the 180 with diaphragms
2.8, 4 or 5.6 it will be acceptable, but why would you them buy such an
expensive lens?
Regards,
Paul.
P.S Check the archives, you'll find more interesting mails about this lens.
> Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 16:30:40 +0200
> From: Leopoldo Sánchez Rodríguez
> Subject: [OM] 200/f4 vs. 180/f2.8
>
> How does the 200/f4 stand a comparison with the 180/f2.8 in terms of
> overall performance?
>
< 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 >
|