75-150 Zoom

For more years than I really care for  arguments have raged over the qualities of lenses that cover several focal lengths  over fixed focal length ones.

Olympus themselves had manufactured a good number during what might in hindsight  be called the "Golden Era" of the OM system  in the late 1970's and 1980's that met their exacting standards.
Just what is the argument against them?
I think the first is for serious landscape photography they are harder to use with filters, specifically those square ones like Cokin's that screw on the filter thread of a lens because most zoom lenses have front elements that rotate when you focus whereas on fixed length ones they do not.
The other is during that era many cheaper zoom lenses came on the market that weren't so well designed spoiling their image. 
It was said at the time you needed to spend two to three times as much for a zoom lens of a similar quality to two or more fixed length ones and many amateurs just were not prepared to spend that.
This said, a good one has real uses like being able to easily control the final image you take very precisely not least on transparency film and this example I own, the 75-150mm F4 is a good example as it provides a very high image quality, offers a wide range of telephoto lengths and yet weighs little more than single 200mm lens which is comfortable for hand hold usage. 
I find its coverage is a good match for what I want in the field saving me carrying the 90mm and 135 and rarely need the 200mm as it's top end of 150 is adequate while saving me from changing lenses frequently.
It also uses a 49mm filter thread just like the regular standard and wide angle lenses which makes working with polarizers and square filters more straightforward for not having to double up on attachment rings and screw in filters.
As the OM system in the early 1990's moved very much toward  advanced amateurs and professionals with the OM4Ti being the only 'new' body available, while only a  few fixed length lenses went from the lens range such as the 135mm, all the Zooms did until they introduced the 35-80 F2.8 in 1995 issued with the OM3Ti.

300mm

I was thinking early on about getting a longish telephoto lens but it's taken now to find an affordable quality option for my OM10 and 40 bodies as most of the independent options from the late 1970's and 80's were rather so-so at best and you are normally talking of around £100 upward for Olympus's own.

Shopping around I found something that would work, the Tamron Adaptall 300mm F5.6 which was originally introduced  in 1976 and phased out in 1979 for the later Adaptall 2  close focusing version.
The early Adaptall lenses do take the later mounts and although this as bought came mounted for the old M42 screw fitting, changing to Olympus OM is quick and easy and for £36 was a bargain.

Technical notes

Lens construction: four group 4 elements

Minimum aperture: 22

Minimum focusing distance: 2.5m

Filter diameter: 58mm

Weight: 580g

Going further out

For a long time I had considered  the advantages of so-called ultra wide angle lenses as I found the 24mm lens a focal length  that didn't seem to offer too many advantages over a 28mm  for the inevitable extra weight of lugging it about without offering some of the advantages  in terms of getting heaps more into the frame or its creative uses building on the perspective distortion when shooting subjects such as cars close.

Around  2000 Vivitar and Cosina had out a 19 through 35mm ultra wide-angle zoom lenses in a variety of manual focus camera fittings including Olympus OM that appealed but tracking down the OM fitting proved difficult and some other options such as the Centon/Sirius 18-35 while plentiful used had terrible reputations for image quality.

As had been a while since I'd bought a 'new' lens, I ordered the Tamron 17mm F 3.5 Adaptall 2 in the high performance SP series

This is the later 151B version that dispensed with the built in black and white photo filters to simplify construction as well as reducing costs and adding a more modern feel to this longstanding lens.

Independent lens tests put this at the same quality as the Zuiko 18mm F3.5 which is some 60% more expensive used and exceeding it's equivalent by Minolta in the MD system.

As with all Adaptall 2 lenses, armed with the appropriate attachable mount they can mounted on nearly all manual focus bodies.

200mm

200mm lens are not the sort of thing you use everyday that's for sure but they have their place in the photographic scheme of thing such as Landscapes - mountain images - where their stacked perspective is easily recognizable 0r for sports photography.This is the Zuiko F4 which as such lenses go is quite light so you can use it handheld although support in the form of Monopods or Tripods really is best as the greater magnification increases the risk of camera shake.I bought mine in May 1997 and really like it's quality.

Moderate telephoto

This is the classic Zuiko 135mm F3.5 moderate telephoto lens good for sports, isolating people at events and air shows.
Although this is half a F stop slower compared to the regular F2.8 version the viewfinder is such you can't notice it and you save quite a bit of weight together with the advantage of using the same size filter thread (49mm) as your wide angle lenses. It makes for an easy to use lens handheld as well as on the tripod.

50mm

As standard you got the 50mm F1.8 lens whenever you bought a new Olympus camera and many used are sold with one.
I find them very useful for nature photography and the Olympus one is really clear and can be used with Teleplus's 2x Macro converter for 1:1 close ups if you don't own a dedicated macro lens.
I wouldn't be without it.

Wide Angle lenses

I consider wide angle lenses to be a basic requirement allowing you the opportunity to take broad landscapes, photograph groups of people at social functions as well as travel pictures and have two for the Olympus OM bodies I use.
In general I am not given to using standard zoom as I find the image quality falls below that which is obtainable from so called fixed length lens and many have the apertures varying as you zoom which messes up manual and spot metering readings.
As I use a tripod making small adjustments to frame the image and keeping it all level is not a big deal to me
For general landscapes I use the Olympus Zuiko 28mm F2.8 pictured below a lot liking its colour renditions and ease of use. The construction of Olympus's own lens is extremely good being all metal.
Another good feature of them is the aperture settings are at the front making for rapid focusing and metering while you are looking through the viewfinder.









I bought this lens in September 1996 for the OM10 when I was test driving it.


My first love though is the 35mm F2.8 which I bought around 2002 from Camtech over the phone.














I found whenever I used a zoom most of time I was using around this focal length because it's ideal for travel photograph and has less of a problem with converging verticals when you photograph buildings. Although the edges wide open are slightly soft they come in by F8 and it looks really good. Some say they found the contrast a bit low but honestly I've never found it on the films I've used (Velvia 50/Reala 100).
I got mine boxed with the case and thin front cape used and love it.