I have owned both the f4 and the f5. I sold both because I rarely used either
after purchasing an 85-250. The really nice thing abut the f5 is that it takes
a 49mm filter and is very compact. Handy for traveling, backpacking ,ect.
Light compact, and you only need to take 49mm filters. You could selel one of
the 200 f/4 and purchase an f/5 and have change left over, how could the CDFO
argue with that logic? I recently sold one in near mint condition on eBay for
about $130.00, which is toward the high end. You should be able to get one for
a bit under $100.00.
Jim Couch
voop@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Just came to think...I've actually never seen one of subj. Neither new
> nor second hand nor in the hands of some other zuikoholic. I don't seem to
> recall it being discussed on the list either.
>
> This strikes me as a bit odd, considering that it should not really be an
> "exotic" lens (as e.g. the 250/2).
>
> I wonder why this is? In one of the german photo books (by
> Frantz...something...) I have, it's being used as almost a "standard
> tele", but I've never come across one anywhere in the real world.
>
> Anyone have this lens? What's the verdict? Is it worth the price (what is
> the price, actually) etc....
>
> Of course.....never having seen one, I'm starting to lust for having
> one...sighs....I've got two 200/4 - how would I justify a 200/5 to the
> CDFO?....
>
> --
>
> -------------------------------------------
> Thomas Heide Clausen
> Civilingeniør i Datateknik (cand.polyt)
> M.Sc in Computer Engineering
< 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 >
|