tscales@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>All are excellent lenses. I would put them in order:
>
>1) Tamron 80-200/2.8. One of the best zooms ever and the best for OM. By
>far. Big and Heavy
>
I agree except for the 'by far' part. The Tokina AT-X 80-200/2.8 is very
close to as good. If the Tamron didn't exist, the Tokina would have the
rep. About the same size, but significantly lighter. Much better tripod
mount design.
>2) Tamron 50-250 - Many think the Olympus 50-250 is the same lens. Excellent
>and less expensive. Lighter
>
I assume you meant the Tokina 50-250? I'm not aware of a Tamron with
that range. The excellent Tamron SP 60-300 is their entry in that derby.
More reach in return for more size/weight and with almost the same
amazing macro capability as the Tokina 50-250.
I did a careful comnparison of the Zuiko and Tokina 35-105 zooms to
check the rumor that Tokina made the Zuiko and posted the results. They
are simply not the same lens, and there are enough differences in
detail/internal design to make a strong case that they are not made by
the same manufacturer. I would guess that the same is true of the Tokina
and Zuiko 50-250 zooms:
1. As with the shorter ones, there is a slight difference in published
speed, Z f5 vs. T f4-5.6. At the long end, that allows a 35.7 mm clear
diameter at f5.6 vs. 40 mm at f5 and proportional differences inside.
That likely accounts for the Tokina being slenderer and lighter.
2. The Tokina is 5 mm longer and 5mm less in diameter than the Zuiko.
3. The Zuiko weighs 100 gr, 15%, more than the Tokina.
4. The Tokina has vastly superior close focus ability, with macro to
1:1.4, vs. 1:5.3 for the Zuiko. I'll bet that means vastly different
optical and mechanical design inside. It's also the major reason I have
the Tokina.
Moose
The olympus mailinglist olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: mailto:olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
To contact the list admins: mailto:olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx?subject="Olympus
List Problem"
|