Such blasphemy, praise for a non-zuiko lens! How can it possibly even be
properly considered a "lens" without Zuiko proudly emblazoned on it?? <G>.
I too have the Tokina 80-200 f/2/8. Hefty it is. Sometimes too hefty for
my preferences, but it certainly is a fine piece of glass IMO. Mine had to
be sent to Tokina for repair when internal lubricants leaked in between the
front two lens elements. The result of improper storage I was told. The
only cost was one-way shipping as it was still under 10-year warranty. I
have considered selling it serveral times as it is one of two non-olympus
lenses in my collection. But it serves it true purpose so well, I may never
get the Oly equivalent. Perhaps a 35mm shift instead <g>
John P
______________________________________
My Grandfather taught me to live by two rules. Rule #1: Don't tell folks
everything you know.
Bill Rice <Brice1021@xxxxxxx> wrote:
<..........>
>My love-hate relationship with the 65-200 ended when I came across a deal
on
>a T*k*na 80 200/2.8. It?s twice as heavy but the picture and mechanical
>quality is excellent. It also has a tripod mount. :-) I dearly miss the
>Zuiko though.
< 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 >
|