At 03:36 AM 1/11/2000 -0800, you wrote in part:
> I don't know why so many have dissed this lens. At its
>introduction date it was considered the sharpest 35mm format zoom lens
>made. It changed many 35mm photographers opinon of medium tele zooms.
>Up until then most just sucked. What do others think of this? BTW there
>will be some portraits I shot with this lens up on the Official
>UnOffical Olympus Gallery as soon as Garth updates the site.
>
>Phillip Franklin
My ADITL-1 shot was made with this lens as well as two in the Unofficial
Olympus Gallery. I like it in situations where I want to carry a light
load: 35-70/3.5-4.5 and 75-150/f4 make a nice combo where handholding will
rule and the film is on the slow side.
Several years ago I took these two lenses to Hawaii with my OM-1 because I
wanted to go light. I left my "serious" Nikons at home. Hitherto I had
reserved the OM-1 for light-duty flash portraits (usually shot by the wife)
until she got a Stylus zoom, and then the OM-1 languished. A number of the
shots from that holiday are in the Unofficial OM Gallery. That episode
started my steady slide into Zuikoholism. The serious Nikons now languish.
I don't shoot the 75-150 much at the 150 end. Up to about 135 it is as
sharp as I expect based on the limitations of my handholding ability.
(Caffeine as well as Zuiko addict :-( )
This lens did apparently suffer from element separation, which I suspect
accounts for its reputation as being flare prone and flat. I would be
extremely careful in buying one of these for this reason. This is one I'd
want to examine personally. I'd never buy one off eBay, for example, not
at least without a good return policy. I think the feel is superb and love
its slim barrel.
Joel Wilcox
Iowa City, Iowa USA
< 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 >
|