Jump to content

Zuiko 35-70mm f4


simon_t__ireland_

Recommended Posts

<p>Hi Folks,<br /> Looking for some info on this lens. I already have the Tokina 35-70m f2.8 and I am wondering how this lens compares with other 35-70mm OMZ.<br>

It seems to be a very decent performer according to Gary:<br>

http://zone-10.com/cmsm/index.php?option=com_content&task=category&sectionid=10&id=45&Itemid=97<br>

BTW, I sort of collects OMZ.<br /> <img src="http://i168.photobucket.com/albums/u161/stingOM/OMCollection.jpg" alt="" /><br /> Cheers,<br />Simon</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>The 35-70/4.0 is supposedly a very good zoom lens - sharp certainly but not particularly light or compact, considering the small aperture. The 35-70/3.5-4.5 is much more compact. Both of these have the classic Zuiko two touch look, with the zoom ring clad in heavy ridged rubber, and the focus ring in standard diamond pattern. I used the /3.5-4.5 for a while and was happy with the results. If I was traveling <em>very</em> light (one SLR body+ one lens), this would be a really possibility. There's also the 35-70/3.5-4.8, a budget lens that was built to go with the Cosina-built OM2000 SLR - inexpensive certainly, but otherwise no different than any other consumer zoom. Never used one. However, for collecting and overall optical performance, the 35-70/3.6 is the one to beat. Very sharp and beautifully constructed (the focusing ring rotates on ~360 tiny ball bearings). However, it's also a big beast, which for me is a problem - I hate the weight hanging off the front of an otherwise small and light OM body, so I use it very rarely. Still, I hang onto it - it really is a gem.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Cheers David. I was looking at one 35-70/3.6 lens. But then I thought why spend €80 on a lens when I already have an even faster zoom Tokina's AT-X 35-70mm f2.8. So I resisted. I guess I am not a really collector in the full sense.<br>

On the other hand I am getting the 35-70/4 really cheap, so I went for it.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>You're probably right - for less than the cost of the /3.6, you could certainly acquire a 28-85/3.5-4.5 AT-X or a 28-90/2.8-3.5 Series-1 - both excellent lenses. Like I said, I have a /3.6, and impressive though it is, it's just too big & heavy (I also have a rarely used 65-200/4.0. Great lens, but again, too heavy) - I would rather carry a few primes than have to use the camera with the equivalent of a jar of jam hanging off the front. My "OM kit" is a 28/2.8, 50/1.4, 50/3.5 macro and an 85/2.0. I might throw in a 200/4.0 if needed. For some reason that I can't fathom (except that it was a bargain) I acquired an OM mount Sigma 600/8.0 Cat., but I have yet to use it. For me, OMs are all about "small and light", and zooms just don't fit.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I have used both Zuikos, the f/4.0 and f/3.5-4.5. The latter is definitely a great performer. One of the sharpest zooms in that range. Also, very light, small and close-focusing. The f/4 seemed to me like the poor cousin. I got one in fine condition but was not impressed by its performance. The f/3.5-4.5 wins hands down.<br>

regards</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...