Completely agree, Jeff. Might add a couple of details to stir things up a
bit, but IIRC can be found in the archives (regarding the 90/2, not the 135
4.5 which I feel has been rather neglected, but I might be wrong of course).
Thanks for answering.
Fernando.
on 3/05/2006 12:53, Jeff Keller at jrk_om@xxxxxxxxxxx, wrote:
> Perhaps it's just a matter of getting familiar with the lens ... the shorter
> focal length of the 90 requires a wider aperture than the 135. Both the 90
> and 135/4.5 are very nice, with the two stops faster aperture of the 90
> giving it an edge IMHO.
>
> I like being able to see the background in Graham's image. Photos with the
> background completely blurred can also be nice, but seeing a plant in its
> environment often has longer appeal to me. Also as a photographer, Graham's
> photo sparks a lot of "what-if" scenarios in my mind ...
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|