Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Olympus dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 23, 2007, 6:35 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
HarjTT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,531
Default

This is an old review of the 35-100F2 lens, but it's one of the rare reviews of the lens and possibly was posted here sometime ago. Well here's the link - sample shots included:

http://zs2.hu/csgzsfoto/technical/le..._en_35100.html

Cheers

HarjTT

:? :O



HarjTT is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Sep 23, 2007, 8:25 AM   #2
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

So, do you have one yet? :-)

I've noticed the price has continued to drop on it, and I see it for under $2k in the U.S. at some dealers now (and they actually have it in stock, too). lol

Olympus Zuiko 35-100mm f/2 Price Search

Whatever happened to the 17-35mm f/2? Didn't they plan on releasing that lens a long time ago? That would be a more useful lens to me if I were shooting Oly. An f/2 zoom with that focal range would be sweet.

But, I probably couldn't afford one. So, it's better that I'm not shooting with a 4/3s based system. f/2 zooms would be too tempting. lol


JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 23, 2007, 9:56 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
HarjTT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,531
Default

Hi Jim

I'm still itching and saving my pennies to get one but the price here in the Uk hasn;t dropped a cent- its still £1599.00= $3223.25US which is well really taking the *******, considering the US price is around $2000.00=£987.00. If purchased from the US, I'd be looking at VAT @17.5% + $71 shipping + Parcelforces price for holding onto the lens (£30), a cool £1310.00.

I'm holding off a wee bit to see how the new 50-200SWD f2.8-3.5 turns out - it looks like a smaller 35-100, and I'd be looking to use it from 50-100/150 - so hopefully, that would still be at 2.8 wide open. With SWD possibly as soomth focusing/zoom as the 35-100 and hopefully, tack sharp at 2.8 too! If its £900, I'll just order it from the US and take the customs hit.

The 14-35f2 was supposed to be out at the same time as the E3 possibly as the kit lens but its been put back again until early 2008. It looks like a monster bit of glass even the one shown in feb 2007 and I've read that they went back to the drawing board because the first version was way too big. Price wise, I'm hoping they don;t go overboard and slap $2000+ on it, and your spot on about F2 zooms being tempting.. just the UK price isn;t!

Cheers

HarjTT






HarjTT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 23, 2007, 2:24 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
tkurkowski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 3,625
Default

JimC wrote:
Quote:
Whatever happened to the 17-35mm f/2? Didn't they plan on releasing that lens a long time ago? That would be a more useful lens to me if I were shooting Oly. An f/2 zoom with that focal range would be sweet.

But, I probably couldn't afford one.
Hi, Jim

An f/2 zoom in that range would indeed be sweet. But the Leica 14-50mm f/2.8-3.5 4/3 lens iswonderful -tack-sharp even wide open -and available right now <grin>. The only thing I wish about it is that it, being more of a prosumer lens, does not have internal focus & zoom. The front lens element set moves in and out which looks a bit dorky and of course cannot really beas dust-proof in the long run. But I love the lens andalthough it's expensive it's still less so than the Oly 17-35 f/2 is likely to be.

Ted
tkurkowski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 23, 2007, 2:28 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
tkurkowski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 3,625
Default

HarjTT wrote:
Quote:
I'm still itching and saving my pennies to get one but the price here in the Uk hasn;t dropped a cent- its still £1599.00= $3223.25US which is well really taking the *******, considering the US price is around $2000.00=£987.00. If purchased from the US, I'd be looking at VAT @17.5% + $71 shipping + Parcelforces price for holding onto the lens (£30), a cool £1310.00.
That's outrageous, especially considering you could fly to the US round-trip for that price difference (although I presume you'd still get stuck with the taxes when trying to get it back into the UK).

Ted
tkurkowski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 23, 2007, 3:39 PM   #6
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

HarjTT Wrote:
Quote:
I'm still itching and saving my pennies to get one but the price here in the Uk hasn;t dropped a cent- its still £1599.00= $3223.25US which is well really taking the *******, considering the US price is around $2000.00=£987.00.
Well, look at it on the bright side. If the price was the same as it is in the U.S, your wallet might be £987.00 lighter by now. ;-)

tkurkowski wrote:
Quote:
An f/2 zoom in that range would indeed be sweet. But the Leica 14-50mm f/2.8-3.5 4/3 lens iswonderful -tack-sharp even wide open -and available right now <grin>.
Yes... but for existing light shooting where you'd normally need an f/2 prime to get shutter speeds up fast enough to help prevent reduce blur from subject movement, an f/2 zoom would be sweet (as long as it wasn't too large and heavy and was reasonably sharp wide open).

It's probably a good thing I'd don't shoot with a 4/3s system, and if I did, it's good thing that lens is not available yet. Otherwise, my wife might not be very pleased.


JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 23, 2007, 6:42 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
HarjTT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,531
Default

Hi Jim

A couple of links:

1. Old 14-35F2 - and that looks huge about 2/3 the size of the 35-100! Ugly to boot as well.

http://www.fotopolis.pl/index.php?n=3415

2. The new 14-35F2

http://www.imaging-resource.com/NEWS/1173209335.html


HarjTT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 23, 2007, 6:49 PM   #8
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

They really don't look too bad from the photos. I could probably live with a lens that size.

I've got a Tamron SP 35-105mm f/2.8 AF Lens that is probably about as bad from a size/weight perspective, with what is probably lower optical quality (and a stop slower and not as wide after the adjustment for angle of view). Of course, I paid a *lot* less for my Tamron than that Zuiko is probably going to run (I got if for $119 from the used department at keh.com). ;-)


JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 2007, 6:15 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
tkurkowski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 3,625
Default

For anyone interested, I put the 35-100f2 through a workout during an event the last few days. Images are here:

http://palyulmedia.phanfare.com/albu...ageID=30514847

From that image onward in that phanfare group, it is the closeups of His Holiness with the file name "TK-239" that were shot with the f2, almost all wide-open at f2 (very little light in that room, and a mixture of incandescent and compact fourescent) using a monopod. That wonderful lens got me up to useable shutter speeds (1/50 or 1/60) at ISO400 on the E-500. Even with a monopod though, IS would be nice.

Ted




tkurkowski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 2007, 5:27 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
HarjTT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,531
Default

Hi Ted

Thanks for the link to the gallery - I'm pretty impressed how well the images look and for 1/50 to 1/60s theyre pretty sharp as well, without any kind of motion blur either.

His holiness looks pretty chilled out too!

Cheers

Harj

:O :?

HarjTT is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 6:55 PM.