usher99@xxxxxxx wrote:
> Gee, Surprised you found the Tam lacking, it is one of my favorites.? Yes it
> is a tad large with a flimsy hood but overall is quite nice.? At 35mm the
> corners/edges are a tad soft esp wide open, but then I don't use it there.?
> MTF reasonably good with Photodo score of 3.6.?
> http://www.photodo.com/product_531_p4.html
>
> Back in the archives it appears to be one of John Lind's favorite nl range
> zooms.
>
That was funny. He resisted the many recommendations from others of us
for ages. When he finally bought and used one, he quickly bought a second.
> The Zuiko 35-80 2.8 is better at the edges at 35mm but is still quite
> expensive, and I assume that's why you did not mention it.? I like the extra
> reach too of the Tam.
>
I've never seen the Zuiko. Always seemed too big, heavy and expensive
for the range. The big drawback of both Z & T is the lack of close
focus. The Zuiko 35-105/3.5-4.5 has the same problem. Yes, it has a
close-focus adjustment, but that's still only 1:5 @35mm and 1:7 @ 105mm.
I'm partial to the Tammy 35-80/2.8-3.8 for the modest, but real, macro
ability, 0.27m/0.9ft. @ 80mm (1:2.5) Good macro performance and decent
stand-off distance. And otherwise an excellent all-round lens, as well.
Terrific walk-around lens for someone who likes to get close to subjects.
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|