I just got some prints back that were the first shot using the 75-150/4 (the
others were shot on Kodachrome, which I haven't sent off for processing
yet). While the prints were of mediocre quality (a local Walgreen's that
had always done satisfactory processing for me before has suddenly gone to
hell) it was clear from the negatives that the lens is very sharp and has
the "right" amount of contrast for my taste.
Photos were of a petrified wood building that offered an excellent target
for evaluating lens resolution. Most photos were tripod mounted making it
easy to compare with the handheld shot or two that either suffered a bit
from operator error (shake) or shallow DOF.
Personally, and very subjectively, I find the lens very satisfactory so far
for my purposes, which are admittedly limited. I anticipate using the OM
gear primarily for documenting these architectural peculiarities. The
75-150/4 zoom gives me the ability to step back far enough to minimize
perspective distortion. But there are few places where I'd be able to step
back far enough to use the 150mm end.
Now I just wish Fat Viv was as petite.
Lex
PS: Film was Fuji Reala 100, with some night shots mixed in among the
daylight photos. The Walgreen's people couldn't figure out what to do with
these and kept trying to make daytime photos out of 'em, with peculiar
results. Another shot kept printing as a panoramic which, to my knowledge,
the OM-1 doesn't do apart from cropping. The enlarged panoramic revealed
the processor was badly out of adjustment. On top of that they deeply
scratched some frames.
Fortunately I can reshoot these since the building is nearby. I shot these
mostly for scanning convenience since I don't yet have a film scanner. But
I'm $16 worth of PO'd.
=========================================
From: Gary Reese <pcacala@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
John Hudson writes:
<< For a 75 / 150 f4 zoom is this lens worth serious consideration or
are there other more up to date brands and models of 75 / 150 zooms
which have superior performance, engineering, and optics for the same
price range in which these sell for new and used and which can be fitted
to OM bodies? >>
Well, I haven't tested any other 75-150mm zooms. By and large, these
were conservative, budget oriented zooms. Most of the optical formulas
are quite dated, having been replaced with: 65-200, 80-200, 70-200, and
70-210 ranges. The 75-150 Zuiko, Kiron (Kino Precision), and Vivitar
(perhaps made by Kino Precision) are fine travel lenses, give the most
popular focal length choices for portraits, are readily available and
are comparatively cheap. It really comes down to one's budget and needs.
I personally can't see ever wanting a 75-150mm Zuiko. The 65-200mm Zuiko
is a better performing alternative and the 80-200mm f/2.8 Tamron is the
performance champ (followed closely by the lighter 80-200 f/2.8 Tokina
AT-X), when I can stand the extra weight and length. For a cheaper
alternative, I'd consider a 70-210 or 80-200 Kiron. There is also the
really hard to find, but outstanding performance 60-120mm f/2.8 Tokina
AT-X.
Gary Reese
Las Vegas, NV
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail 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 >
|