Bau writes:
<< - - 35-80 cost: Exactly what makes it SO much more expensive then other
zooms in that range (such as the 35-70 or 35-105)? Is it just the f2.8
aperture? >>
Zuiko designers were reputedly given free reign to design the best they could
for release on an anniversary of the company. They employed ED glass and
gave the lens very high build quality. The f/2.8 aperture and the fine
performance at most all settings is what justifies the expense of the lens in
THEIR eyes. They also have a nice contract with Sinar to sell them for use
with a digital camera.
- - 24mm f2.8: Were there multiple version of it such as SC and MC or are
they
all the same?
Yup, there is an SC produced from 01-74 to 12-81 and a MC produced from 01-82
to date. The former is much more common on the used market.
- - 35-70 f3.6 vs f4. Is the latter one a newer version? A short stint
withboth at the camera store reveled that the f4 was somewhat easier to work
with. Is this true? Are they both multicoated?
Only you kbow if it is easier to work with . . . They were both multicoated
since introduction in 01-79 and 11-80, respectively. They both went out of
production about 06-89. I've used all the 35-70mm zooms and find the f/3.6
the best handling, due to size, distance between rings, and the nifty lens
hood with variable depth. It also has superior performance and built quality
over others marketed by Olympus. Others will argue that it is to big and
heavy [it has lots of ball bearings, for one], but it is increasing evident
that the heavier lens within a focal length class is the superior lens
OVERALL.
Gary Reese
Las Vegas, NV
< 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 >
|