Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] Zuiko 85 f2 vs Zuiko 90 f2 Macro

Subject: Re: [OM] Zuiko 85 f2 vs Zuiko 90 f2 Macro
From: Jim Couch <JamesBCouch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2001 10:46:43 -0700
Boy do I know what you mean what you mean by empty wallet and full cabinet! :)
I am thinking in terms of the 135/telescoping tube combo as well. I am trying to
come up with the 'ultimate' combo for field macro work. (Yea I know - RIGHT!)
One thing that is attractive about the 90 f2 is that I still have good working
distance and could get by w/o extension tubes in most cases. On the other hand,
if I AM going to carry the telescoping extension tube than the 135 might make
some sense. Or maybe I will go back to the good old days of the 35-70 f3.5~4.5
with a single extension tube, took some fine flower portraits with that combo.
Ah choices, choices, choices!

Jim Couch

Skip Williams wrote:

> First my take on the 90/2 vs 85/2.  The 90/2 is quite a brute of a lens, and
> not one I'd take just anywhere.  The 85/2, as Tom pointed out, is VERY
> compact and produces very nice images.  Both would be the "easiest"
> solution.  I just got my 85/2 about 4 weeks ago, and I'm very pleased.
>
> SNIP

> Third, I was playing around with the 135/4.5 & Auto-Tube last week and I was

> surprised at the versatility of that combo.  You get a macro with a very
> large working distance, which is good for insects.  And you get a general
> purpose 135, which I used for a few portraits wide open (no slides back yet
> though).  The downside is that the combo is very heavy and bulky.
> Skip
>


< 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