Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] interiors

Subject: [OM] interiors
From: Joseph <joseph@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2000 03:02:56 -0800 (PST)
===========================
Why is the 21/3.5 "too slow for interiors" ?  Surely if you are doing
architectural work, you would be using a tripod, probably stopping down to
f8, so the only advantage over the f2 would be somewhat easier focussing due
to the brightness.
===========================

when you can fit a tripod into the space, absolutely.  But some interior shots
can only be done handheld available light for various reasons.  



Wayne Harridge
Ivanhoe, Victoria, Australia
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Louvre/6152/ 

< 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 >

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2000 23:43:33 -0800
From: "Gettis John" <jgettis81@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [OM] Re: long lens discussion

I just checked it $820 and the reserve is not met yet and 1 day is left.
John Gettis


< 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 >

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2000 15:46:57 +0800
From: "Harridge, Wayne" <Wayne.Harridge@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [OM] Black vs Chrome/Titanium WAS: OM-2S question

John A Lind wrote:

> 1.  The less credible onee:  The black will not show up in reflections
> (windows, etc.) as readily as chrome.  This would undoubtedly be more
> concern to commercial or special effects work.  You would 
> also have to use
> a black tripod, and do a few other things to help conceal the 
> camera in the
> reflection, especially the lens.

Yeah and "OLYMPUS", "CANON", "NIKON" in white wouldn't be much help here.

Wayne Harridge
Ivanhoe, Victoria, Australia
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Louvre/6152/ 

< 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 >

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2000 08:38:16 +0100
From: Emil Pozar <emil.pozar@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [OM] Super FP - Minolta??

Dirk Wright wrote:
> 
> >It was introduced with 700si/5400HS combo. It is called HSS (high
> speed
> >sync). Examples cameras: 600si, 800si, 9, 505si super..
> >
> 
> yeah, but that was long after Olympus came out with Super FP, isn't it?

Yes. Moreover, with Nikon and Canon added, not a big deal anymore.

- -- 
Regards,

Emil Pozar
epozar@xxxxxxxxx
http://www.geocities.com/photoemil



< 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 >

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2000 23:54:13 -0800
From: "Gettis John" <jgettis81@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [OM] contents of main camera case

>
> John how much did the bag weigh?  Merely the 300/4.5 and the T32 are
> items that I think about carefully before taking in the bag.
>
> And what is the bag to carry all that stuff?
I have been going to the wild animal park with a little less equipment then
that.  I have been taking the 35, 50 for photos of the kids.  The 100 and
extension tubes + T32 for the indoor butterflys and the 300 4.5 and the
teleconverter for the birds and the Animals.  If you go real early and hurry
down the hill you can usually get some good shots of the Cheetahs walking
around before they bid down for the day.  I let the wife and the kids take
the tram while I photograph.  On the way down the hill there is a pond that
has some birds that belong there and sometimes wild geese, ducks, and
Egrets.  I missed  getting a shot one day of a egret catching and eating a
mouse.  The park by the way is the San Diego Wild Animal park and is worth a
trip.  Oh and the bag is a Tamrac I think a 609 but not sure one of the
medium sized ones.  Last time I weighed it it was somewhere around 55
pounds. when it is fully loaded.  John Gettis


< 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 >

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2000 06:57:59 +0000
From: Barks <cmib@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [OM] wide angles

>
> > If you want a supwerwide Zuiko for landscape work, the 21/3.5
> > zuiko would be the best choice.
>
>It might indeed be the way to go. I'm very satisfied with the 28/3.5 (apart
>from the slow speed, which becomes an issue when using the lens indoors), so
>using a 21mm as a complimentary lens (and ditching the 24mm) might not be a
>bad idea. For now, I'll give the 24/2.8 some more tries to see if I can get
>more satisfying results with it, and if not, then I'll consider getting a
>21mm.

That is what I have done: I now have a 21/3.5 complementing (note the 
'e' BTW) my 28/2.8.    But only to rationalise my range, since the 
24/2.8 worked very well for me.

>....  the various samples. One thing I did notice
>though is that the 28/2 seems to get extremely high grades. If this lens
>really is every bit as good as the test shows, then it will make sense to
>look for one of those as a superior replacement for the 28/3.5.

The 28/2 is a good lens, with good close-up capability, but it is 
larger than the 28/2.8 (and I suppose the 3.5) and I am always aiming 
for compactness.
>
>Normally one would assume the F2 versions to outperform the F3.5 versions.
>So, what's the list conscensus about the 28/2 vs. the 28/3.5, and about the
>21/2 vs. the 21/3.5?
>
>Cheers!
>Olafo

Not necessarily because I remember reading a lens test about 15 years 
ago in which the f2 lens was slated for being much softer than its 
slower sister.  However, I am not a good judge of lenses in general.

Chris

~~~~~ ><>
Chris Barker
mailto:cmib@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

< 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 >

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2000 08:12:16 +0000
From: "Giles" <cnocbui@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [OM] OM-4T(i) paint

Put it in a glass case and admire it from a distance?

Giles

John Pendley wrote:

> of fooling with one of those, what's the best way to protect a black body?
> 

< 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 >

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2000 08:58:17 GMT
From: "norman dudman" <nor_45@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [OM] oly 135 3.5 for sale

Sorry for incorrect info on this lens for sale.  Joseph is correct, it's my 
135 2.8 thats multicoated, the 135 3.5 I have for sale does not say MC. I 
still think £30 for a mint lens is good value.
Norman
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com


< 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 >

------------------------------

End of olympus-digest V2 #1388
******************************
Joseph


< 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 >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz