Hi Gary,
Thanks for your comments.
> Many, including myself, find both the 35-70mm f/3.6 and a 35-70mm
> f/3.5~4.5 useful to have on hand. They serve mutually exclusive
> purposes, so don't give up one for the other.
I don't plan to do so either. I begin to see a reason for having both.
> The 35-70mm f/3.5~4.5 might very well be a Zuiko which is subject to
> being out of tolerance, thus resulting in some samples being better than
> others, either through abuse or poor initial build. (The similiar
> polycarbonate Canon FD model sure fits that description). I would
> suspect that someone would have a "dog" of a sample if they totally pan
> this lens as "poor." It isn't when its in tolerance.
Well, it does not give THAT poor results or something which would give me a
hint of an error. I bought it in mint condition from my trusted local photo
shop. There is no sign of wear. It is just not as sharp as my primes. On the
other hand, for a zoom lens I don't expect it to deliver results comparable
with a stepped-down 50/1.4 or the 85/2. There is some poor build quality,
however: the front barrel shows some play (0,5 mm movement of the focussing
ring towards the focal lenght ring). But that does not bother me or will not
result in image errors, I think.
In short: It's a nice little lens.
Regards
Bernd
< 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 >
|