Hi Tom:
<< but would love to hear other's experiences. >>
Philip F.'s suggestions that one could be bought in retail for $69 or
thereabouts sent me south where I indeed found one. It makes the third I
have owned. I have on again off again love affairs with these petite
pups, but always seem to be talked out of them by others who desire one.
Pro:
Extremely light weight
High versatility vs. weight ratio
Excellent performance vs. weight ratio
Constant apertures when zooming at f/4.5 and smaller
Ability to use a metal 50mm f/1.8 hood as a nested lens hood
Con:
Extreme barrel distortion at wide end
Distortion at any focal length
Noticable softness at f/22
Lack of depth of field scales
Difficulty in focusing due to
1) softness wide open
2) lack of lens speed
Too small for fast handling ability
This latest one is going to be a keeper, but for situations which call
for a minimalist outfit. Otherwise the 35-70mm f/3.6 is MY pick and
those with a 35-80mm f/2.8 would likely say THEIR pick. Among Zuikos. if
one has a f/3.5~4.5 and a f/3.6 or f/2.8, then the f/4 and f/3.5~4.8
have nothing more to offer, IMHO.
Gary Reese
Las Vegas, NV
< 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 >
|