on 5/29/04 10:14 PM, Ross Orr at voxbongo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> So, I joined the Olympus list about 6 months ago. . . And tonight,
> out of some perverse curiosity, I added up the total price for all
> the OM gear I've bought since then. I thought I had been getting some
> reasonable xBay deals, so I was mortified to discover I had topped
> $700 USD!
>
snippo...
>
> Your thoughts?
>
> -- Ross
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> "Do something foolish once, and it's a mistake.
> Do it repeatedly and it's a philosophy."
Ross, you're not trying very hard...
I think there are some really good cost/value choices to be made. The slow
wide angles e.g. 21/3.5, 24/2.8, 28/2.8, 35/2.8 all make a lot more economic
sense than the fast wides... typically they sell for half or less than the
equivalent f2.0 focal length. If you aren't using that lens wide open, the
difference in performance is probably undetectable under normal image
viewing conditions.
On to the telephoto end, I think there are some good bargains in the
aftermarket 80-200 zoom lens arena. I have a couple (heh...) choices in this
range, and here again, stopped down to typical outdoor use f-stops like f5.6
to f11 they perform as well as is needed. Buying one lens that covers the
range is more economic than having (and carrying...) three or four primes
between 85 and 200 focal length.
If you go with primes, I think an aftermarket 90 macros, either the Vivitar
90/2.5 Series 1, or the Tamron 90/2.8 are a better economic choice than the
Zuiko 85/2.0. Not as fast, but you get closer focusing instead. OTOH, the
85/2.0 -is- one of my favorite lenses... Then the Zuiko 100/2.8 is
definitely a bargain compared with the Zuiko 100/2.0, probably 1/4 the cost
or less. I think if you want a moderate telephoto an even better bargain is
the Zuiko 135/3.5, which handles very nicely and stopped down is as sharp as
the 135/2.8 or other choices thereabouts, yet will cost only 1/2 what the
100/2.8 costs... The Zuiko 75-150/4.0 is a handy choice at current prices if
you think a zoom with that range is a good substitute for primes. It was
part of my original OM kit way back when. If you find a good Zuiko
65-200/4.0 I think it makes more sense for ~$200 than a 200/4.0 for $125 or
so, but looking at that range and cost in a zoom I'd keep looking for either
the Tamron 80-200/2.8 or the Tokina 80-200/2.8. Bigger and heavier, but
gains a full stop for not much more money, and they are very sharp and
usable all through the focal length range.
So my kit would look like this:
21/3.5; 24/2.8; 35/2.8; or you could cover the widest end of the range with
a 18-28 zoom, either the Samyang or the Phoenix/Vivitar. Both are less than
half the cost of the Zuiko 21/3.5 and stopped down will look as good as the
other Zuikos. The 35/2.8 is a true bargain, usually less than $80 and a very
good lens.
For the normal lens, a MiJ 50/1.8 is a no-brainer. That 1/2 stop wide open
isn't much, its still easy to focus, and a sharp as all get-out when closed
down.
Then either the one big fast zoom (Tamron or Tokina) or three primes: 90/2.5
(Vivitar or Tamron); Zuiko 135/3.5; Zuiko 200/4.0. You could cover the tele
range with something like a Vivitar 85-205/4.5 or similar from Tokina or
Tamron instead at some considerable cost savings. The Vivitar 85-205/3.8 I
got for $25... that's not a price where you need to even think about it.
Of course building a kit this way is not what I actually did... so your $700
seems like a long time ago and a few (heh...) lenses back... but I can stop
any time. Really. I can! I can so...!
--
Jim Brokaw
OM-'s of all sorts, and no OM-oney...
I finally got my 'short list' short, but now I'm really short -- of cash...
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|