Andrea,
I would never hang my 300 off my camera. It is just too
much weight for the mount. Im was just using it yesterday,
and was thing about how much balanced the whole setup is
when you mount the lens to the tripod. I had my 24 mounted
on my 4t, and it mounted on the tripod, and left the mount
in the same place while I changed over to the 300, and
then remounted the tripod to the lens. The flex I felt
while doing all this made me think that next time I will
mount the 300 to the tripod first, and then the body on to
the lens. I also hand-held the combination, but it was a
bright day, and I was using Portra 160VC, and getting
speeds of 1/500 sec at times.
John
On Tue, 28 May 2002 18:08:15 -0700
Andrea <pdxgirl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Having looked at KEH's 300s, this is my question:
Has anyone bought a "bargain" rated lens from them?
Given the kind comments
that Winsor had about KEH, could one reasonably expect
that the glass would be
ok? I really don't care what the outside of the lens
looks like.
Another observation: on the KEH site, the lenses are
shown with what I'd guess
is a tripod mount. The lens I bought on eBay does not
seem to have this mount
(on rear of lens, has a little knob on one side). Should
a 300 come with this
mount or is it just shown on the website for display
purposes?
- Andrea
Winsor Crosby wrote:
keh.com has four on their web site. A number of us on
the list
prefer buying from a reputable dealer with a fair return
policy
rather than the reality TV adventure of the Bay. Keh
seems to
consistently rate their equipment lower than what you
actually
receive.
< 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 >
|