I'm becoming increasingly amused by the fact that more and more Zuikoholics are
choosing pretty much the same focal length prime lenses I did, even if some are
the slower and/or non-macro versions. Just proves how smart most of us are.
(In case anyone forgot, I picked the 21/2, 50/2 and 100/2.)
If we could have more than three, I'd put the 35-80/2.8 on the list.
And if we could do non-Zuikos, for sure the 80-200/2.8 Tamron would make the
Then there's the 135/4.5, but I didn't think we were doing the "real" macro
lenses. I've probably taken more pictures with this lens than any other. Like
my guns, if you want it, you'll have to take it from my cold, dead hands.
> OK ...
> 21 mm 3.5. For years, by far the best landscapes. Color and contrast.
> Now just obtained the 21mm 2.0 ... I'll be interested in whether I think
> it's better.
> 100 mm 2.8. My go-to lens for people and city scenes. Compact. Good
> The third choice is hard ... too many to choose from ... I guess the 1.4
> 50 mm because of low-light capabilities. But the 28 mm 2.0 is close.
> Bob Benson
The olympus mailinglist olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: mailto:olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
To contact the list admins: mailto:olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx?subject="Olympus