Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Re: [OM] 35-70's Your opinions

Subject: Re: Re: [OM] 35-70's Your opinions
From: chris@xxxxxxxxx
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 10:03:33 -0600
There's at least one on *Bay right now.  I've never owned the F4 version,
but from what I've heard:

1.  Size - slightly lighter/smaller than the F3.6 version
2.  Quality - less "sharp" than either the F3.5-4.5 or F3.6 versions (but
according to most not all *that* bad)
3.  Price - should be cheapest of the three.

Of course, other's might have differing options, but they're entitled to be
wrong!  :-)))

Hope that's helpful...

Regards,

Chris

----- Original Message -----
From: Larry Otto <larryotto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, July 06, 2001 9:58:42 AM
To: <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [OM] 35-70's Your opinions

> Hi,
> All this talk about 35-70 zooms has me wondering about the 35-70 F4.0
> version? How does it compare in size, price, and especially in quality of
> photos with the 3.6 and the 3.5 to 4.5 versions? At least I think I've
seen
> an F4 version
> selling on EBAY from time to time?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Larry
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Timpe, Jim <Jim.Timpe@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Friday, July 06, 2001 8:18 AM
> Subject: RE: [OM] 35-70's Your opinions
> 
> 
> > >>>-----Original Message-----
> > >>>From: Erwin Voogt
> > >>>However, focusing can be quite difficult with the 35-70/3.5-4.5. In
> > reality
> > >>>the lens operates as a F4.5 lens: at 35 mm the aperture closes down
to
> > F4.5
> > >>>when the aperture ring is turned to F5.6 or higher. So the "bright"
> > >>>viewfinder of F3.5 is only available when the lens is set to 35 mm
> _and_
> > the
> > >>>aperature ring is set to F3.5!
> > >>>For me this was a reason to look for a brighter zoom, although I
still
> > use
> > >>>the 35-70/3.5-4.5 because of its small size.
> >
> > I'm not committing heresy... really.  For the above reasons I keep a
> Soligor
> > 35-70/2.5-3.5 in my stash for really low light or difficult focusing
> > situations.  It's comparable in size to the Zuiko 3.6 and noticeably
> > brighter.  Image quality is perfectly acceptable.
> >
> > Can't beat the 3.5-4.5 Zuiko for a small, versatile package, though.
> >
> > Jim
> >
> >
> >
> > < 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 >


< 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