Dear Dawid,
I worked many years with Zuiko 135/3,5 and it was a superb lens. Wide
open was soft but stoping down just a little bit was very sharp and
contrasty. You can have a look to some pictures here. Maybe it appears
"skip the ad" but press the button and that´s all.
http://victorian.fortunecity.com/byzantium/656/img0034.jpg
http://victorian.fortunecity.com/byzantium/656/img0043.jpg
http://victorian.fortunecity.com/byzantium/656/img0044.jpg
http://victorian.fortunecity.com/byzantium/656/img0059.jpg
Dawid Loubser escribió:
> Thank you kindly for all the links to the informative images.
> The reason I asked, is that I have for a very long time been a fan of
> 50/1.2 lenses,
> and specifically Canon's has been my all-time favourite lens in the
> past.
>
> I have been toying with getting a Zuiko 50/1.2 for precisely that
> reason, I am
> currently using the "lowly" Zuiko 50/1.4 which I am actually very
> happy with.
>
> I don't want to start a thread on the merits of each, just
> contextualising why I
> enquired in the first place.
>
> P.S. Is it just me, or does the Zuiko 135/3.5 absolutely trump the
> Nikon? There
> is simply no comparison between the two images.
>
>
>
> On 09 May 2009, at 2:02 AM, Wayne Harridge wrote:
>
>
>> Dawid,
>>
>> This might be of some interest:
>>
>> http://lrh.structuregraphs.com/test/olympus_portrait_lens.htm
>>
>> Unfortunately it doesn't include the 100/2 or 90/2 (I don't have
>> either).
>>
>> A few Nikon lenses for comparison if you're interested:
>>
>
>
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|
