I see now that Yongnuo has added a 42.5mm micro4:3 prime with autofocus. Perhaps if reviews are decent I could try that lens to fill in the gap - or perhaps not. If 20+60 works for me, why change it?
Curiously enough, I now have a similar pairing with the Nikon: a 35mm (Yongnuo in fact) and 90mm. Since the 𝛍43 setup is 40+120mm in equivalent field of view, it's a slightly wider setup with the D600. Light gathering is similar also, discounting equivalence: f/1.7 vs 2.0 wide, both f/2.8 telephoto. All small lenses for what they do, and the 90mm has the added benefit of 1:2 closeups (1:1 with screw-on multiplier).
I find the 𝛍43 has no real competition for a wide-standard zoom in my kit; the 14-42ii is talented and tiny but rarely gets use, while the 45-150 does come along with the 20 much of the time instead of the 60mm. In Nikon however I really like the 28-105D zoom; it also can do 1:2 closeups, is fairly fast at f/3.5-4.5 and its sharpness and OOF 'bokeh' are really good. It fights the two primes to a draw, so neither gets a wide margin for most-common use with the D600. That's changing for a while though, as shots of comet NEOWISE favor the f/2 and 2.8 primes!
Curious times in the prime-acquisition business.
I have yet to do the battle of the Superwides (17/3.5 Sigma vs Tamron 20-40 2.7-3.5) to determine which gets to come along most often. First impressions are decent for both, with flare being an old-school issue for both of them. Hopefully soon I'll pick a winner there, and let the other go.. for a 𝛍43 YN 42.5mm lens, praps! Hm, 40+90 is closer to 35+90mm..
No comments:
Post a Comment