>
> I rarely use the OM adapter with anything other than the 50/3.5, 90/2,
> 180/2.8, or 300/4.5. There are others I could use it with, but mostly
> the DZs cover the ranges as well or better without the inconvenience.
> (I know that Ken will be out to scalp me of what little hair I have
> left for saying that ...)
>
Nope. No scalping. The DZ lenses are amazing. What's interesting to me,
about using the ancient lenses on the E-1 system is that I'm now a far
better OM system user. Knowing where the diffraction limits are on a given
lens has been quite revealing and pictures from the OM system are
benefiting.
The 24/2.8 and 35/2.8 give the most incredible 3D-like images with the E-1,
the 50/3.5 is just sharp in every way and has a comfortable "relaxed" bokeh
that doesn't look awkward or gimmicky. The 100/2.8, although sharp, doesn't
yield the same bokeh characteristics that it does on film (mysteries of the
universe), and the 200/4, which is typically rather pedestrian on film, is
incredible on the E-1. The 300/4.5 is just plain wonderful on both systems.
Life is good.
AG
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|