Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] 90/2.0 vs 135/3.5 for distant landscape

Subject: Re: [OM] 90/2.0 vs 135/3.5 for distant landscape
From: Jan Steinman <Jan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 13:12:25 -0800
> Sandy Harris wrote:
>>
>> Is the four thirds 50/2 as good? Would it work well as a general- 
>> purpose short tele, street shots & portraits?


It's a stupendous macro lens -- world class.

Where it falls down for general-purpose photography (IMHO) is  
autofocus speed. Especially in dark conditions, it will sometimes  
search all the way out, then back, which is an annoyance for street  
shots and portraits, where you want zippy autofocus.

Since I got the 12-60, I don't use the 50/2 for anything except macro.  
But it does cost a lot less than a 12-60, and if you aren't following  
action, the occasional auto-focus foibles should not be too much of a  
bother.

:::: Given an infinite source of energy, population growth still  
produces an inescapable problem. The problem of the acquisition of  
energy is replaced by the problem of its dissipation. -- Garrett  
Hardin ::::
:::: Jan Steinman <http://www.VeggieVanGogh.com> ::::


-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/

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