Chuck Norcutt wrote:
> I think Olympus is perhaps trying too hard to compete on lens speed
> rather than weight. Take the 35-100 f/2.0, for example. It's direct
> competition for the 70-200 range for full frame Canons. Canon makes two
> pro quality lenses there, the 70-200 f/2.8 and the 70-200 f/4.0. I used
> to think the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 was heavy at 1470g (no tripod mount) but
> the Oly 35-100 f/2.0 weighs 1650g (no tripod mount). Granted, you've
> got an extra stop there if speed is your thing but you don't have the
> option of buying the equivalent in a one or two stop slower and lighter
> lens. Slower and lighter is available but also at the cost of lesser
> lens quality. A high quality 35-100 constant aperture f/2.8 or even
> f/3.5 would be a nice addition. And what gives with that oddball 11-22?
> That doesn't seem to fit in any kind of consistent system scheme.
>
> Chuck Norcutt
>
>
Chuck,
I think you have hit the nail square on the head here! In the old OM
days you usually had the option of two different lenses - one fast and
one lower and lighter. (Not so on the zooms, as most of them were
compact, but slow!) In any case the OM system seemed to really leverage
the compactness and weight advantage of the system, something that
Olympus has not done with the E system for the most part.
Jim Couch
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|