Used 1.4x, huh? How much did you pay?
Skip
----- Original Message ---------------
Subject: [SPAM] [OM] Re: E1 vs E300
From: "C.H.Ling" <chling@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2005 00:31:04 +0800
To: <olympus@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
>The 7-14 is expensive but still reachable, it is cheaper than a 24 shift :-)
>Just like the 50-200, I may wait for a used one. BTW, just bought a used
>1.4x at good price, it extended the range of my 50-200 by 40%, may be
>marginally good for some bird shoots.
>
>I agreed the 50-200 is good enough for creating shallow DOF shoots, a fixed
>150/2 is just not that flexible in many cases. A fixed wide or macro will be
>more usable.
>
>C.H.Ling
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Skip Williams" <om2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>>
>> The 7-14 is currently showing a $1,800 selling price. Yikes!
>>
>> The 11-22 is a super lens, and one that I've never been sorry that I
>> bought. The 7-14 is overkill for most of us mortals. If I want more FOV
>> than a 22mm equiv, I'll put my 15mm lens on my Leica. For the number of
>> times that I'd really NEED the 7-14, it's much more cost effective.
>>
>> If you want shallow DOF, buy the 150/2.0, or one of the new PMA, f/2.0
>> zooms that have been rumoured. But the 50-200/2.8-3.5 is very nice at
>> shallow DOF, It's like a Zuiko 180/2.8 shot almost wide open, which
>> produces very nice results.
>>
>> Skip
>
>
>==============================================
>List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
>List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
>==============================================
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|