35-100 F2 Lens
Tomorrow is the final day for the $250 rebate on this lens. I am
seriously on the brink of pushing the buy button but I am having
concerns that it is just too heavy and not a very suitable travel
lens. I am sure I could sell off my 50mm F2 macro lens to lighten the
load. Has anyone had experience with this lens in conjunction with an
EC converter. That combo could make this a very versatile lens.
I would be using it with an E1 body.
My other lenses:
Note, the 35-100mm is not that close focusing, so if you use the 50mm for macro type subjects, you would miss its loss, though the 70-300mm can do some of that. Also in terms of weight, when you have the 35-100mm, you won't notice the extra weight or size of the 50mm. You wouldn't need the 50mm for low light anymore, except when you want to travel light.
I suspect the 35-100mm might tax your current camera bag with its 8" length and 3lb weight. I've had to upgrade my bags when I upgrade my gear.
I've borrowed the 35-100mm for a couple of hours, and it is heavier when wearing it around the neck than my 50-200mm, which I am used to, but then not as heavy as the 90-250mm.
On the other hand, the bokeh from from lens is much nicer than the 50-200mm, and it gives you an extra stop for low light photography.
FWIW, I travel with my 2 bodies, and medium level lenses (11-22mm, 14-54mm, 50-200mm). It is doable, but there are times when I'm traveling, that I don't want to carry the 20-30 pounds of gear, and I just go out with the smaller point & shoot that I have. I do have to think about what I'm bringing, as I also need to travel with laptop and a medical machine (CPAP) for my carry on gear. I suspect the 35-100mm might be a bridge too far (or lens too big/heavy) for normal travel.
So in summary, the lens may be problematical as a travel lens, but that may be outweighed by the image quality of the lens.
|Blue and yellow in water by fireplace33|
from Ink and water
|Kylmä joki kopio by Kaappo|
from Shutter speed 1/25 or slower
|WR_2.8_13 copy copy by photoprof|