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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Feb 22, 2009, 7:42 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
zig-123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,145
Default

Hi All,

I started taking some photos of traditional dry flies that I've tied over the years using the 14-54mm ZD lens. As much as I like the IQ of the 14-54mm, I'm finding that I'm really missing thedetail of the 50ZD macro.

Here area couple of images





Maybe it's time to get that EX-25 Tube!

Zig


zig-123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Feb 22, 2009, 7:48 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
boBBrennan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Arlington, Texas USA
Posts: 3,554
Default

........Greg has me convinced that " I need one " but I so far I've not taken the bait (pun intended)


boBBrennan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 2009, 8:31 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
zig-123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,145
Default

Sorry to hear about your cold Bob. Doesn't sound like it has effected your wit :?


zig-123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 2009, 8:34 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
zig-123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,145
Default

Just to put things in perspective, here's an image of an average saltwater streamer that I use in the salt vs a #12 Fan Wing Royal Coachman-an average Trout dry fly that I used in a stream.




zig-123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 2009, 8:53 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
zig-123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,145
Default

Smaller still.

And yes, I've caught trout on all the flies pictured:


zig-123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 2009, 10:48 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,241
Default

The only fly I'm able to post is one of these...



I love seeing your flys, Zig. Too bad I'd never have the patience to create something as detailed as your handiwork.

I suppose that the grass is always greener... I've been thinking of a lens realignment. I'm thinking of selling several lenses, the fifty included, to get to the kit (12-60, 35-100**, 50-200, and 35 macro) **the one I need to raise funds for

Perhaps I shound re-think. I've always loved the 50 f2.

A few more that others have never seen from that lens. A thistle flower (full frame)



A wild flower (full frame)





The planet.... Ummm.... I mean a dandelion head after the wind has done its task (Close crop)







fldspringer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 2009, 11:39 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
zig-123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,145
Default

Hi Greg,

If it's any consolation, the fish will eat yourfly a lot faster than they'll eat one of mine:-)

Just a quick word on whyI tied my own flies, when I first started flyfishing, I was snapping flies off at an alarming rate. I got them caught on branches, trees, bushes - my own waders everything but the intended target, trout! At the time, flies were priced around 1.25 apiece. Money, I didn't have at the time. I had to do 2 things in a hurry if I was going to continue with this maddening sport. Improve my casting and learn to tie.

One thing has come out of all ofthis effort- I can tie a pretty good fly. I still can't cast worth a lick!!! ...............and truth be told, I have never saved any money.:?

As for the 50mm vs the 35mm macro. The 50mm to me, is about as near perfect a lens as I've ever owned. I regret selling it and one day, I'll get another. I'm sure you have very good reasons for wanting a 35mm in place of the 50 but , if it were me, I'd just keep the 50mm and never look back.

As for your ideal lens assortment. That's a prettyslick collection of lenses. I've not used a 35-100mm but confess that I've looked at sample photos on various sites. It's another fine example of Olympus' outstandinglens quality.

Zig








zig-123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 2009, 1:14 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
boBBrennan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Arlington, Texas USA
Posts: 3,554
Default

WOW! ..........that is all I am going to say.

You both have put me where I belong; in the viewing gallery at the exhibits.

tnx,
____
boBB
boBBrennan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 2009, 2:53 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
tkurkowski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 3,625
Default

zig-123 wrote:
Quote:
As for the 50mm vs the 35mm macro. The 50mm to me, is about as near perfect a lens as I've ever owned. I regret selling it and one day, I'll get another. I'm sure you have very good reasons for wanting a 35mm in place of the 50 but , if it were me, I'd just keep the 50mm and never look back.

As for your ideal lens assortment. That's a prettyslick collection of lenses. I've not used a 35-100mm but confess that I've looked at sample photos on various sites. It's another fine example of Olympus' outstandinglens quality.

Zig
Did I miss the two threadshere, that you mentioned - 35mm macro versus 50mm, and Greg's ideal lens assortment? Or am I just tired?

(grin)

Ted


tkurkowski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 23, 2009, 5:45 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,241
Default

tkurkowski wrote:
Quote:
zig-123 wrote:
Quote:
As for the 50mm vs the 35mm macro. The 50mm to me, is about as near perfect a lens as I've ever owned. I regret selling it and one day, I'll get another. I'm sure you have very good reasons for wanting a 35mm in place of the 50 but , if it were me, I'd just keep the 50mm and never look back.

As for your ideal lens assortment. That's a prettyslick collection of lenses. I've not used a 35-100mm but confess that I've looked at sample photos on various sites. It's another fine example of Olympus' outstandinglens quality.

Zig
Did I miss the two threadshere, that you mentioned - 35mm macro versus 50mm, and Greg's ideal lens assortment? Or am I just tired?

(grin)

Ted

I was thinking out loud between my fly pic and the rest. The bottom line is I desire to own the 35-100 lens and it is a pretty penny, in fact about 190,000 pretty pennies.

I also have never sold a lens. There are those that I just don't use that much and they take alot of room. The original kit lenses from my E500 don't get used, I have a non SWD 50-200, as well as the SWD and only need one, the 11-22 is rarely used (I'm not a wide guy I guess) and the 14-54 which I got as the E-3 kit lens is also on my hit list.

I know I would make extensive use of the 35-100. I also know I use the 50-200 almost exclusively now. The 50 macro has been my macro lens, but I was thinking the extra magnification of the 35 might be handy, but the more I think about it, the more I enjoy the 50 f2 too much. I'll run the two (35 & 50) side by side and see which gets the bulk of the use.

So the plan is... to sell off a bunch of stuff I don't use much to pick up the 35-100, keep one macro lens, the 50-200 SWD, and pick up a 12-60 at a future date. Just four lenses, all would get used. I'd also keep the EC-14 converter. That's my plan.

Sorry for thinking out loud

Greg
fldspringer 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 1:51 AM.