Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] Telephoto lens.

Subject: Re: [OM] Telephoto lens.
From: Ingemar Uvhagen <ingemar.uvhagen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 08:07:39 +0200
First of all: a Big oops!! Of course I meant that point 3 and 5 was the most
interesting things for the moment, not no. 4 as I wrote.

George,

I appreciate your mail and that you are sharing what you know and heard. As
you said I probably want more speed, I am very aware of that fact, but for a
start I would like to think a Zuiko 300/4.5 plus a Zuiko 1.4x TC can give me
something like what I am looking for. The more speedy, and more expensive,
lenses may be in the future I am afraid. Well, I guess you are right: It never
ends...

Regards/
  Ingemar Uvhagen
  Gislaved, Sweden


gma skrev:

> Ingemar;
>
> I didn't get a chance to respond to your original post.  But here's my 2
> cents:
>
> Point 3, below, would be my choice in this price range.  I have this
> combo and it is great.  Very sharp, low flare, good contrast.  A photo
> buddy has the Tokina 400 F/5.6 (in a Nikon mount) and it is definitely
> inferior to 300 + 1.4x Zuikos.  I've done a comparison.
>
> Now, having said all this, I'll add one more (sacriligious?) (crazy?)
> point.  You're gonna want more, no matter which of these options you
> choose.  More speed especially.  I think I recall wildlife was one of
> your intended subjects?  You'll want the fastest lens you can get.  Not
> only will it allow you to take photos in low light and shadow, but it'll
> be far easier to critically focus.  So what I'm saying is, perhaps for
> double the cost of a 300 + 1.4 Zuiko (used in USA that'd be about ...
> $600 - 800 I think?) you could probably find a good used Tamron 300
> F/2.8 LD, about which I've heard good things.  Be sure it's the latest
> top-of-the-line model, as the first release wasn't so good. Course a
> Zuiko 350 F/2.8 would be better, but that'd cost about $3000 used!  OK,
> OK if you can't afford it I'm sorry to bring it up.  I'm just passing
> along what I learned.  If you can possibley stretch to this price, do
> it. Who can justify that much for a lens?  But it may be the right thing
> in the long run.  Course you'll want to add a 1.4 or a 2X ... it never
> ends.
>
> Good luck.
>
> Ingemar Uvhagen wrote:
> >
> > Thanks to all!
> >
> > To sum up the question I had about what telephoto lens to go for:
> >
> > I have read all the mails and I think I understood that:
> > 1. The Zuiko 400/6.3 is a very good lens, but quite expensive even for a
> > second hand lens.
> >
> > 2. A Sigma APO 400/5.6 is a very good alternative and is a quality lens
> > as well.
> >
> > 3. That using a Zuiko 300/4.5 and a Zuiko 1.4x TC is a very good
> > alternative and perhaps just as good (or better?) than the Zuiko
> > 400/6.3.
> >
> > 4. That I should avoid any mirror lens.
> >
> > 5. That a Tokina 400/5.6 may be a good buy as the quality is quite good
> > and the price is nice. (Then what about adding a 1.4x TC and get
> > 560/7.8??)
> >
> > There are a whole lot more to be said, and I still wonder. I must say
> > though, that point 3 and 4 seem to be the best, due to the cost/quality.
> > Have I understand it all? Is there something I have missed? Let me know
> > then!
> >
> > No matter what I thank you all, I have gained more information here than
> > from any camera dealer ever! I am serious!
> >
> > Have a nice day/
> >   Ingemar Uvhagen
> >   Gislaved, Sweden
> >
> --
>
> george  :>)
>
> < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
> < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
> < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >






< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz