I think some tests show that the Tamron 2.5 (not the 2.8) is almost as good
as the Zuiko, and the Tokina is "better."
I used to own a Tamron 2.5 which I sold when I bought the Zuiko to help pay
for it. It's about 4x-5x in price difference. I remember that the Tamron
being very good and there is no way any other 90mm 35mm lens, Zuiko
included, to be 5x "better."
But the Zuiko is magic....
At 09:40 PM 4/8/2002 -0700, you wrote:
Some months ago there was a discussion about the lesser expensive
alternatives to the 90/f2 Zuiko macro. I recall somebody mentioning a
Tamron 90/2.5 which they held in high regard.
Can anyone refresh my memory and opine on the Tamron, or was it a Sigma,
lens in question.
Thanks
John Hudson
Vancouver, BC
// richard http://www.imagecraft.com
[ For technical support, please include all previous replies in your msgs. ]
< 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 >
|