 Micro Four Thirds User Forum |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
1
|
943
|
Fri July 20, 2012
|
|
 |
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
Average Rating
|
|
No recommendations
|
$95.00
|
6.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Mu-43 Regular
|
|
Posts: 159
Registered: March 2011
|
|
|
|
Author
|
|
harrysue
Mu-43 Regular
Registered: March 2011
Posts: 159
|
|
Review Date: Fri July 20, 2012
|
Would you recommend the product? No |
Price you paid?: $95.00
| Rating: 6
|
|
Pros:
|
Zuiko Reputation
|
|
Cons:
|
Old technology, must fix CA and contrast with PP
|
|
I've read that there were two OM 200mm primes, an f4 and an f5. Some say the latter is rarer, and perhaps better because of that? This is just an owner's comments on the f4 version.
It's a nice lens, but not worth the $95 I paid in 2005. At the time, I wanted more tele than what my Oly 4/3 40-150 zoom could do. It was very hard to use on a 4/3 DSLR so I wrote it off as a silly purchase.
Now it's 2012 and I have micro 4/3 cameras to use. Much easier to focus and use.
This image was brightened up in Photoshop Elements 8. WB adjusted too. Shot with an EPM1, f4, hand held at 1/160 second with IS working.
A 100X crop from the above. I believe this lens can be hand held ... sometimes.
I don't recommend this lens at the price I paid for it. I later bought a new M.ED 40-150 for not much more money and that's a far better lens. Still, if you find it for a song, pick one up. Like all Zuikos, it's sharp in center. Lacking modern coatings, contrast suffers by today's standards, and you will need to fix this and CA with post processing.
|
|
|
|
Powered by: Reviewpost vB3 Enhanced
Copyright 2009 All Enthusiast, Inc.
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:43 PM.
