It's not bigger and heavier than the 100/2. They feel remarkably similar.
Honestly, until it was pointed out, I didn't notice the aperture ring in the
back. It just falls under your fingers. It isn't, however, the only Zuiko
with the aperture ring at the 'wrong' end. That list is longer than you
think and includes:
35-80/2.8
75-150/4
50-250/5
35-70/3.5-4.5
35-105/3.5-4.5
85-250/5
You'll note the trend that many of the newer lenses had it relocated. I
wonder if that was because of new design techniques. Admittedly, these are
zooms.
Might be more, these were just on my shelf.
Oh, and I'm pretty sure the 350/2.8 is heavier.
Tom
> At 07:43 PM 2/10/2003 +0100, Bernard Frangoulis wrote:
> >>You forgot the people who like the lens, but are mystified by the
> >>difference in feel between this lens and most of the other lenses in the
> >>line. It's like it was made on a different manufacturing line or
something.
> >
> >What do you mean ? I'm mystified...
> >...
>
> It's heavier, bigger, and the aperture ring is in the back of the lens.
All
> unlike any other Zuiko.
>
>
> // richard
< 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 >
|