No, it isn't a monster at all, Chris:
Filter diameter: 77mm with hood 27FH
Weight: 346 g
Maximum diameter X total length: 64.5mmx65.5mm
In other words, comparable in size to the S Zuiko 35-70 (the Cosina made
olastic-bodied design) and somewhat smaller and lighter than the Zuiko
35-70/3.6. Admittedly, it is double the length and weight of the Zuiko
24/2.8.
Yhe hood is a bit of an oddity. As Bill says, the hood isessential if you
want to mount filters, but if you do so, you can make the problems worse,
since strong light from behind the photographer can show at the edges of the
frame if the subject is dark! It took me a while to work out that the
"flare" was coming in through the back of the hood and reflecting back off
the inner surface of the filter - once you know, it is not hard to make the
necessary adjustments.
--
Piers
-----Original Message-----
From: olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Chris Barker
Sent: 21 January 2006 19:29
To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [OM] Re: WTB Zuiko 24/2.8
Thanks Piers, but I fancy the 24/3.5 is still out of my league -- even if
you were considering putting it up for sale. I am keener on a prime than a
zoom, but is the Tamron a big beast?
Chris
~~ >-)-
C M I Barker
Cambridgeshire, Great Britain.
+44 (0)7092 251126
www.threeshoes.co.uk
homepage.mac.com/zuiko
On 21 Jan 2006, at 17:13, Piers Hemy wrote:
> Sorry, Chris, I don't have a 2.8, I only have the 3.5 ;-)
>
> And I do not claim any position on any team.
>
> But I do have two Tamron SP 24-48 zooms... with hood
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|