Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Re: [OM] Ideal lens for photographing inside a church?]

Subject: Re: [Re: [OM] Ideal lens for photographing inside a church?]
From: Craig Cunningham <craig.cunningham@xxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 09 Feb 2003 21:43:54 -0600
Derek,

Definitely go with the 35/2.8 -- I'm considering the 100/2.8 at KEH, so I
believe that you'd be better served if you bought the 35 and leave me a few
more days to consider the 100  :-0

 - Craig


derek fong <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Saturday, February 8, 2003, at 05:55 PM, Per Öhström wrote:
> 
> > I've never photographed a baptism, but I do have and use two Zuiko 
> > zooms
> > extensively - the 35-105 and the 65-200. I've never thought of them as 
> > too
> > dark to focus, but sometimes too slow to hold still, especially the 
> > 65-200.
> > The obvious solution is a monopod. (Or a tripod, which of course is 
> > even
> > better but more difficult to move around quickly.) I think both are 
> > very
> > good lenses, but the 65-200 really has the edge. A wonderful zoom lens 
> > with
> > a really good macro feature @ 200 mm. It all depends on how close you 
> > can get
> > but if I wouldn't know in advance I would stake my bet on the 65-200, 
> > since
> > it probably would be easier to keep a distance than to push towards the
> > center of the action. On the other hand, the 35-105 is definitely more 
> > of
> > an allrounder and probably the lens I use the most (possibly with the
> > exception
> > of the 24mm f/2.8).
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Well, first off, thanks to all for the great suggestions!  They have 
> been very helpful, and I am now re-evaluating the "situation".
> 
> I originally thought that since I already have a 28/2.8, my best bet 
> would be to get a telephoto lens of some sort (I was thinking either 85 
> or 100mm) to shoot this event.  My reasoning for this was so that I 
> could either take some portrait photos (before and after the baptism) 
> or get in close if I end up being too far to get decent shots with my 
> 50/1.8.  However, I am now considering getting a 35 or 100 (the 85/2 
> is, unfortunately, too expensive for me).  I think some good arguments 
> have been made to keep me away from buying and using a zoom lens for 
> this particular event (even though it would be a good thing to have as 
> an all-purpose lens later).
> 
> Like I said, though, I'm now torn by whether I should get something at 
> the short or long end.  I can see the rationales for going either way, 
> but I'm thinking (personally) that maybe something at the telephoto end 
> would be more practical for me after the baptism since I already have 
> the wide and normal end of the spectrum covered.  That was part of the 
> reason I was originally considering a zoom lens, but if I won't be able 
> to use my new "toy" for the baptism, then I just can't justify getting 
> a new lens right now...
> 
> Any thoughts?  My budget is roughly US$180, so I'm thinking I can 
> afford either a 35/2.8 or a 100/2.8 from KEH, but not both.  :(
> 
> -f
> 
> 
> < 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 >
> 



< 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