Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] Re: 7519772104 reasonable 40f2

Subject: [OM] Re: 7519772104 reasonable 40f2
From: Der Eiserne Reiter <ferider@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 17:25:42 -0700 (PDT)
Has anybody tried the Voigtlander 40/2 Ultron (Asp) in OM Mount ?
Or for that matter is there any experience with the other CV lenses
(like the 125) on an OM ?

Thanks & Best Regards,

Roland Ruehl.

--- Wayne Culberson <waynecul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Earl Dunbar" <edunbar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <olympus@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2005 7:57 PM
> Subject: [OM] Re: 7519772104 reasonable 40f2
> 
> 
> >
> > Well, 40mm (or 42mm) used to be pretty much a standard for Oly 35
> > compacts.  I particularly like them better than the 40mm.  We've gotten
> > used to 50mm as a "standard", for sure, but that little bit of extra
> > width, with the completely natural and unobtrusive perspective, makes a
> > helluva difference to ME.  If I could afford the Zuiko OM pancake, I'd
> > have at least one.  If Maitani were still at the helm, I'd be emailing
> > him every day for a 40/f1.2.  I'm sure no one else at Olympus today
> > would listen.
> >
> > Earl
> 
> The 35RC with it's 42mm lens is still my favorite camera. I shot several
> rolls of slides with mine last month in Bolivia. But I don't know as you
> really see in the 40mm range with one, as the viewfinder (guidelines) are
> less than what the lens sees.
> 
> If one really sees significantly better in 40mm range, rather than in 35mm
> or 50mm, with an OM, then I suppose you could always put the much cheaper
> 35/2.8 on an OM10, and you probably would be actually seeing in about 40mm.
> Given this list, I suppose someone will figure it out accurately :-) I used
> my RC and OM10 so long before I found this list and subsequent single digit
> OM's, that I've never learned to see that accurately. If I really have to
> have 40mm rather than 35mm or 50mm, I suppose I could pick from one of
> several zooms I have. But I know, it wouldn't be f2.
> 
> The whole digital thing pretty well renders accurate framing obsolete
> anyways. Just shoot enough, and crop it to where you want it. Everybody here
> probably already knows perspective doesn't change until you take a step
> forwards or backwards. When we're talking accurate framing, we're pretty
> well talking slides aren't we?
> 
> Wayne
> 
> 
> ==============================================
> List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies:        olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
> 


                
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new Resources site
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/

==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz