You guys are going to drive the price of Walt's lens back up. Give it a
rest. :-)
Wayne
> I remember Pop photo retested the F2.8 Tamron zoom (can't remember
> 28-105 or 35-105) at close distance, not really close but just half
> length portrait, the result was poor, they compared it to a Sigma
> cheap 3.5-4.5 zoom at same aperture and it lost. BTW, sharpness is not
> everything, most Zuikos has excellent color rendering including the
> 35-80.
>
> C.H.Ling
>
> Winsor Crosby wrote:
>
> > >
> > >Walt
> >
> > Here is the key to the argument. If it is a bright, sunny day and
> > you shake them around while taking a picture the 35-80/2.8 is no
> > better than anything else. Sheesh. Pop Phot said it was the best zoom
> > they had ever tested. They did not say that about the Tamron or the
> > 35-105/3.5-4.5 Zuiko.
> >
> > As for light my experience is that when you are on a trip and it
> > rains or is clouded over it is nice to get an image with F2.8 and a
> > little bracing with 100 ASA than to get no image with a slower lens
> > or the degraded image of a faster film. I encountered a low light
> > situation at the UCLA Japanese Garden recently on a sunny day, but
> > tree shade so deep I would not have gotten any pictures without 2.8.
> >
> > People get depressed or testy during the holidays. Hope Walt feels
> > better after the new year.
> > --
> > Winsor Crosby
> > Long Beach, California
< 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 >
|