I second Skip's thoughts. Fantastic little lens -- and I mean little. We
had a thread a few months back about how many of us had sold our 200/4 and
kept our 200/5, mostly for size. I was surprised how many did the same thing
I did.
Tom
> I have a 200/5 and I really like it. It needs a bright focusing screen
> though. I'd recommend a Beattie, 2-4, 1-4, 1-10, or 1-8. Otherwise it's
> pretty dim at F/5.
>
> The size is remarkably small too. Similar to many other 135's.
>
> I often use it just for the purpose you describe, for my kid's games.
>
> The sharpness and image quality is fine, especially for a <$100 lens. It
> is a no-lose decision to at least have one for a while. Sell it if you
> don't like it.
>
> Skip
>
> At 01:39 PM 6/8/01 -0700, you wrote:
> >I would be interested in users' opinions of the 200 mm f/5. I like the
> >idea of the small size, and the 49 mm filter size. I would use this
> >lens for kids softball games, etc. I read Gary's review of the lens,
> >but I am more interested in a user's viewpoint, rather than a technical
> >evaluation.
>
>
>
> < 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 >
|