On Sat, 20 Jun 1998, Winsor Crosby wrote:
|Denton wrote:
|>
|>It's funny that you should say this because I have been thinking along the
|>same lines. It is probably wishful thinking to hope for a body, but... how
|>about a new lens?
|>
|>Someone in there loves us enough to get a new product out now and then...
|>witness the 35-80 and the 2-13 screens. They proably lost a bundle on the
|>zoom but probably have made a bundle on the screens.
|>
|>What would the votes be for one new lens, if everybody had one choice?
|>
|>It should definitely be a prestige lens, but relatively affordable (no 400
|>2.8); should fill a glaring hole in the line; and most importantly, sell
|>enough units to make Oly some real money--so that they might do it again.
|>
|-snip
|
|I would vote with my credit card for a 35/1.4. If Oly wanted to best the
|others, perhaps it could be one of those in between apertures like 1.2. I
|can't think of a more useful low light lens for handheld shots. Shooting at
|F1.4 or 1.2 at a relatively stable one over the focal length speed of 1/30
|of a second. This type of lens is almost the only reason I have ever had to
|envy the Nikon system.
Another nice wish lens. Hmmm... I suspect the Zuiko
wizards can produce a 35/1.4 with a 55mm filter size. A
35/1.2 may require a 62mm or 72mm one.
< 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 >
|