Tim
I have had the Sigma and I sold it only because I found someone
willing to sell me the DZ 50-200 very cheaply. The Sigma is quite a
bit lighter than the DZ, but the quality is good as far as I could
tell. Because it is lighter and shorter you are probably more likely
to have it stashed in your bad than the big DZ.
Chris
On 25 Aug 2006, at 06:29, Tim Randles wrote:
> I'm gunning to add 2 more lenses to my arsenal.. so I am comparing
> the following..
>
> E*AY Item number: 140022555807
> Sigma AF 55-200mm F4-5.6
>
> compared to
>
> http://www.olympusamerica.com/e1/sys_lens_50mm28.asp
>
> about the only difference I sort of understand is the F:4 on the
> sigma and the F:2.8
> on the Zuiko.. and I still dont really understand that, except it
> has to do with the amount of light it will let in.
>
> Is there any other differences ( aside from price) that I should
> consider here..
> {I gotta tell you though, I had the Zuiko on my e-500 yesterday at
> the shop and I got a rush of raw testosterone holding it in my
> hand..(LOL)}
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|