Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] Tamron 2.8/28~105

Subject: Re: [OM] Tamron 2.8/28~105
From: "C.H.Ling" <chling@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 11:33:17 +0800
There is always an argue whether a lens is that much better than the
other one, does it worth the cost different or the weight penalty?
Such as the Zuiko 50/1.2 vs 50/1.4, Zuiko 90/2 vs third party, Zuiko
35-70/3.5-4.5 vs 35-70/3.6. I think it all depends on how you look at
it and your personal taste. 

The 35-80/2.8 is a superb lens, I said that not because I have missed
the chance of selling it in my last FS :-), it give me a chance of
trying it out. I'm not surprise for its superb resolution, what
surprise me was it didn't look harsh. I have seen a very harsh slide
three years ago a friend shown me, he said it just like many Ni*on,
that is one of the reason I didn't buy it at that time. But yesterday
I got some Velvia back and found both color and contrast are very
pleasing and they are even shot under strong sunlight! I'm going to
finish another roll of Provia F and I will know more by that time. The
final objective assessment will be completed after shooting a roll of
my mostly used negative - Fuji Superia 200.

I once own a Zukio 35-70/3.5-4.5, both old and new version Zuiko
35-105. I don't like the 35-70 because the distortion at the wide end
and hard to focus (I only use matte area focusing), it is also not as
sharp as my 35-70/3.6, for me the light weight is not justify. For the
35-105, I seems to like the old version more, it is not as harsh as
the new version and color looks more natural but also slightly not as
sharp. I have tried some portrait with the new version 35-105 its
color and high contrast is just not for my taste. At the mean time,
there is light falloff at the tele end at portrait distance. It also
has the same problem as the 35-70/3.5-4.5 - hard to focus at the wide
end with matte screen, the focusing angle is very large. The F2.8 and
~90 deg focusing make the 35-80 a winner. 

C.H.Ling 

Walt Wayman wrote:
> 
> I prefer prime lenses for serious work with slow film.  I seldom
> use film faster than ASA 160, and that speed generally only for
> B&W.  I've got 17 primes and three zooms, and only one zoom sees
> regular use, a 3.5-4.5/35~105 Zuiko.  In my humble opinion, while
> the 2.8/35~80 Zuiko is an outstanding lens, the holy grail of
> Zuiko zooms, it is too expensive for what it offers compared to
> the 35~105, being less than a stop faster overall, having a
> shorter zoom range and an odd filter size.  Plus, I don't think
> it's all THAT much better optically.
>

< 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