Yes, those numbers are interesting Winsor.... and my aim is indeed to
reduce my kit to the minimum. It's just that when I pick the little
lenses and camera bodies up to photograph them, they seem to speak to
me: "Don't let me go Chris, sell another lens; I'm only little, and
you'll regret it..."
Anyone else hear these voices?
Chris
At 08:55 -0700 1/8/02, Winsor Crosby wrote:
It is large. I don't know about unwieldy. It handles fine. And
consider that my "kit" is frequently the camera around the neck with
a 24 in one pocket and the 135 in the other. No camera bag.
For comparison, the length is 99mm, diameter 69, weight is 650 grams.
The 90/2 is 71mm long, 72mm in diameter, 550 grams. Interestingly
minimum focus for the 35-80 is 0.6 meter and the 90 is 0.4 meters
--
Winsor Crosby
Long Beach, California
?
--
<|_:-)_|>
C M I Barker
Cambridgeshire, Great Britain.
?
+44 (0)7092 251126
mailto:imagopus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.threeshoes.co.uk
... a nascent photo library.
< 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 >
|