Skip Williams wrote:
> Has anyone used both of these lenses? I am looking for a real good medium
> zoom, and I like the extended focal length of the Tamron, but I'm concerned
> about image quality. The Tamron's $900, the Zuiko $1100.
>
> I have a Tamron SP 80-200/2.8, and it's one of the sharpest lenses I have,
> but my Tamron 35-80 is just OK in comparison. All the other stuff I have ,
> save a Vivitar S/1 90mm macro, is Zuiko.
>
Hi there skip,
I've been using the olympus 35-80/2.8 lens for about a month now and am very
impressed with the results (although not checking the lens thoroughly), at a
focal length of around 50mm it tends to get results comparable to the excellent
50/2 zuiko macro lens, which is unbelievable for a zoom lens.
and here is a quote from popular photography's (august 1995) test of the lens:
"conclusion:
High priced lens but highest quality performance and handling.
Slightly large an heavy for a 35-80 zoom thanks to its constant 2.8 max
aperture...
Splendid performance in close up and macro range...
Distortion can make it less advantageous for linear copying...
at 35mm sharpness well above average... optimum quality at f/8
at 80mm center sharpness well above average, optimum f/8-f/11.
nominal pincushion distortion may not even be detected in pictures...
SQF performance excellent at all lengths...
one of the best short zooms we have ever tested..."
That's that, bye,
Johny Debel
##################################################################
# This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List
# To receive the Olympus Digest send mail to: listserv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
# with subscribe olympus-digest in the message body.
#
# To unsubscribe from the current list send a message to
# listserv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx with unsubscribe olympus in the message body.
#
# For questions email: owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
##################################################################
|