Hi Gord, I didn't notice this message till now. I have tried to space
out my focal lengths I have a 16mm, 24mm, and 28mm and then it jumps to
the 50mm, so I wanted something in between. This was despite the fact
that Skip Williams told me shoot for a while before you buy more. I
guess I could have gone to the 35mm f2 but the thinness of the pancake
was the attractiveness. So small, the thought of putting the camera in a
jacket pocket and shooting was the curiosity. As you say, at least I
got it for a very reasonable price. In my acquisitions I did get some
slower lens and will probably want to get the f2 version of the 24. I
do want to start selling on e-bay one of these days some of the extra
lens I got in the acquisition process. I still want to shoot the 180
and 250 f2 and the 350 f2.8 but I think I will live without them and
hopefully just resort to a rental for those lens as well as the 1000mm.
Parroting Ali, I had acquired the lens handbook and read through it. It
is such a marketing tool as it rationalizes the acquisitions for this
sickness. Regards, Joe
P.S. I am enjoying the 200 you sold me. However Purolator wants $50 for
customs and brokerage. I think that's outrageous. There bill seeks $30
as an appropriate allocation of their surety bond on a $250 value of
shipping. I will let you know how I fare in fighting them.
-----Original Message-----
From: Gordon J. Ross [mailto:gordross@xxxxxxx]
Sent: Saturday, March 20, 2004 12:04 AM
To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [OM] Re: My Name is Joe. I am a zukoholic
Hi Joe:
As per Rob Harrison's idea of subj. evaluation, what is the fascination
for
the 'press lens', 'pancake lens' I am not being sarcastic, I am not
familiar
with it and would like to know if it is its rarity or it's delectability
that commands 3 to 4 times the price I would look at for a 35/2.0?
Prices seem to have taken a dip (may not be permanent) as I just got a
16/3.5 fisheye with covers and case in (I would even call mint
condition)
for $550. and I just 'won' a 180/2.8 for $435. I know why I wanted
them,
and what I would replace as witnessed by my posting of items for sale. I
am
a zuikoholic, but I do have a game plan of equipment that I will use and
some propriety (ok not that much- but some) over what I have in
'inventory'
at any given time. I can concur with Rob that the self test method is
expensive, as that is what I have done, but you can't read about a
lens
and know what you want or need you just have to go there. So back to my
specific question - what is 'there' re: the 40/2.0 ?
Gord
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joseph Ascione" > I know I thought it was going for too low and I
figured if I put a bid I
> thought wouldn't win, it would satisfy my need to bid. I know it is
as
> is but it is represented as one owner with no scratches. Such is life.
> Joe
The olympus mailinglist olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: mailto:olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
To contact the list admins:
mailto:olympusadmins@xxxxxxxxxx?subject="Olympus List Problem"
The olympus mailinglist olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: mailto:olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
To contact the list admins: mailto:olympusadmins@xxxxxxxxxx?subject="Olympus
List Problem"
|