tell us your dream lenses

[nightpiper]

my dream lenses to complement the E1 wud be the 11-22mm, 35-100mm & the 90-250mm along with a 1.4x teleconverter.

u pretty much cover an enormous range from 22mm to 700mm (35mm equiv) with the above lenses. :devil: :devil: the only thing not covered is macro.

well, macro aside. if u were to travel, this range will give u enuf useful focal length coverage w/o the weight & at the same time, no compromise on image quality.

cost wise, i reckon it wudn't be as expensive as "the other sides" for the same range coverage. :bsmilie:

i call this setup the 3 Aces. :lovegrin:

 

[XanderMan]

My dream lens:

1) 6mm(12mm) f2.8 Rectilinear sibei ultra wide.
2) 4mm(8mm) f2.8 Circular fisheye.
3) 6mm(12mm) f2.8 PC Rectilinear sibei ultra wide.

No interest in long lens watsoever

Realistically based on shipping and announced models:

1) 7-14mm f4.0
2) 11-22mm f2.8-f3.5
3) 8mm f2.8 fisheye
4) 50mm f2.8 macro

 

[tao]

Me not so greedy, just gimme the 11-22mm F2.8 and the 50mm F2.0 Macro and I will be a happy camper.

But.... I really hope that Olympus can release some cheap 4/3 prime lenses... 14mm, 17mm, 25mm, etc. No need to have ED elements, just make them simple and with large apertures, that will be good enough. Perfect for general lowlight use and street shooting, then I can stop using my OM lenses.

 

[koolz]

I just wan the 11-22mm, 14-54mm, and 50-200mm. Maybe the 50mm too.

 

[drektster]

wide angle, super wide angle

 

[NMSS_2]

i will need two more to complete my fetish for Oly lenses.

14-35 and 50-200 or 90-250.:cry: *virus attack again!

 

[nightpiper]

in the past, it was 14-54mm & 50-200mm. but things change & they start to get very interesting!! :lovegrin: the 35-100 & 90-250 is really something i can drool about all day long. :angel:

a new motto for today is:

BUY LAH!!

then:
KEEP LAH!! :sweat:

why keep? cos its too expensive, so keep at home & admire its quality under halogen light. :bsmilie:

have fun drooling....!!

 

[tao]

Really the upcoming F2.0 zooms from Olympus are looking amazing to me in terms of their speed and optical quality. :thumbsup:

But me can't even afford their F2.8 series!! :cry:

 

[ykkok]

Basically, I need 2 more - 11-22mm and 50-200mm, both f2.8-3.5.

With my current 50mm macro, and 14-45mm, they cover from 11-200mm (22-400mm).
I'm happy with the 50-200mm, which is light, fast and sharp enough to give me 300mm equiv. at f3.2 and 400mm at f3.5.

 

[tao]

And to fan your 4/3 lens lust, here is a Complete Listing of the current 4/3 Lens lineup :bsmilie:

 

[jpcc]

Mmmm, pardon my ignorance, tao.
Why u need ZD prime when u have OM prime in hand?

What is the perceived improvement other than AF?

TIA.

 

[bariq]

Mmmm, pardon my ignorance, tao.
Why u need ZD prime when u have OM prime in hand?

What is the perceived improvement other than AF?

TIA.

ZD lenses are sharper than the old zuico primes. And focussing and shooting step down is bit cumbersome. Having said that my old zuico 135 still produces the best bokeh, a real gem of a lens. :thumbsup:

 

[say123]

With money concern and the type of lens available,

my choice would be,
14-35mm f2
50-200mm f2.8-f3.5
50mm f2 macro

:bsmilie:

 

[tao]

Mmmm, pardon my ignorance, tao.
Why u need ZD prime when u have OM prime in hand?

What is the perceived improvement other than AF?

ZD lenses are sharper than the old zuico primes. And focussing and shooting step down is bit cumbersome. Having said that my old zuico 135 still produces the best bokeh, a real gem of a lens. :thumbsup:

After some rather unscientific testing, I can say that my 40-150mm ZD lens at 50mm is as sharp as, if not sharper than my OM MC 50mm f1.8 MF lens at the same f-stop. That shows the quality already. Not that the OM prime lens is not sharp, just that it is obviously not optimised for digital.

But why am I using it? As bariq described, it has beautiful bokeh to die for, something I can't get with as well with the kit lenses which are f3.5~5.6 and this is great for portraits and 'creative' shots. :thumbsup:

 

[Artosoft]

After some rather unscientific testing, I can say that my 40-150mm ZD lens at 50mm is as sharp as, if not sharper than my OM MC 50mm f1.8 MF lens at the same f-stop. That shows the quality already. Not that the OM prime lens is not sharp, just that it is obviously not optimised for digital.

But why am I using it? As bariq described, it has beautiful bokeh to die for, something I can't get with as well with the kit lenses which are f3.5~5.6 and this is great for portraits and 'creative' shots. :thumbsup:

How can the lens that is not optimised for digital is not as sharp as those optimized for digital one?
As you already know, the lens that is not optimized for digital sensor will project its center of image to the digital sensor, which is smaller than 35mm film area. The center image of the 35mm lens is the most sharp one.

Regards,
Arto.

 

[tao]

How can the lens that is not optimised for digital is not as sharp as those optimized for digital one?
As you already know, the lens that is not optimized for digital sensor will project its center of image to the digital sensor, which is smaller than 35mm film area. The center image of the 35mm lens is the most sharp one.

Regards,
Arto.

Hi Arto, you are right but only to a certain extent.

My testing tells me that the ZD zoom lens is sharp from edge to edge, unlike the OM prime lens which is sharper at the center as mentioned by you. Objectively, even at the center, the ZD lens is still sharper than the OM prime lens at the same f-stop. Go figure.

Obviously, I don't get corner softness issues at all with the the E-300 dual kit ZD lenses, even though they are merely kit lenses. But overall, the ZD lenses are really sharper than many 'normal' prime lenses out there, save the excellent f2.0 ZD primes with super-ED elements.

 

[Artosoft]

Tao,

Did you put OM prime lens on e-300 (or e-1) body, or are you comparing the ZD zoom kit lens on e-300 body with OM prime lens on 35mm Camera?

If you are comparing digital and 35mm, you are right, since you are comparing small ccd sensor area and big 35mm area.

But if you comparing both on e-300 (or e-1), in my opinion, you should see OM prime lens is much sharp than ZD zoom kit lens.

Regards,
Arto.

 

[Merciless_Knight]

Dreams Lenses har. ;p

All the Silver tip/Silver ring series. :lovegrin:

7~14mm F4
14~35mm F2
35~100mm F2
90~250mm F2.8

150mm F2
300mm F2.8

++
50mm F2 Marco
8mm F3.5 Fisheye

BTW Dream Lenes only... So Dream On.... :bsmilie: :bsmilie: :bsmilie:

 

[nightpiper]

Tao,

But if you comparing both on e-300 (or e-1), in my opinion, you should see OM prime lens is much sharp than ZD zoom kit lens.

Regards,
Arto.

hi arto, there's this big confusion i see in u. the new digital ZD kit lenses r really that good. :thumbsup: the concept of having prime better than zoom is now over with Oly ZDs. if u have tried the ZD 50-200mm, u will really be amazed by the kind of detail it can resolve. no bull sh1tting here.

i rem last time when matrix wanted to sell his ZD 50-200mm, he posted a shot taken of this jap lady from car show. it was shot from almost waist level up, he cropped 100% at the eye & guess what? her contact lens & red veins in the eye were clearly visible!! :sweatsm: thats how good the ZDs r!! :devil:

if u want to compare prime lenses, i have tried the best of all best Oly OM lenses, the OM 90mm macro. i can tell u very objectively, its still no match for the ZD 50mm macro in terms of color & detail resolving. for reference sake, this OM 90mm macro lens is way better than my Nikkor 55mm AIS macro (which was already a legend on its own). u can visit my old gallery to see them for urself.
http://photobucket.com/albums/v224/flatscreen/55mm Nikkor/
http://photobucket.com/albums/y154/roundscreen/OM 90mm macro/ (this is for OM 90)

besides, i like to highlight to u that what makes a good lens is not base solely on the sharpness & those MTF charts. u also need to look at colour reproduction, chroma errors, distortion & flare control. the Oly digital ZDs has all this qualities fulfilled. the best prime lenses i have seen to date irregardless of brand r the ZD 150mm & ZD 300mm. they literally knocks ur socks off!! :devil:

 

[tao]

Tao,

Did you put OM prime lens on e-300 (or e-1) body, or are you comparing the ZD zoom kit lens on e-300 body with OM prime lens on 35mm Camera?

If you are comparing digital and 35mm, you are right, since you are comparing small ccd sensor area and big 35mm area.

But if you comparing both on e-300 (or e-1), in my opinion, you should see OM prime lens is much sharp than ZD zoom kit lens.

Regards,
Arto.

Arto, are you using an E-300 or an E-1? Any insights into your own findings?

Quite obvious that I am comparing the ZD lens and OM lens on an Olympus E-system body, in this case, an E-300. The OM lens can be mounted by means of an OM-4/3 adaptor. If I am comparing them on 2 different bodies as described by yourself, the 'test' will not be valid at all.