On 15 Jan 98 at 14:22, Gary Schloss wrote:
> Shawn Wright wrote:
>
> >Here's the text from the 90/2.8 1:1 MF (Adaptall II) page:
> >http://www.tamron.com/tamhome.html
> >
> > Specifications:
> >
> > Lens Construction (Groups/Elements) 9-10
> > Weight 15oz (426g)
>
> Interesting! Compared to the last (55mm filter) 90/f2.5 version w/o
> its extension tube, the new lens is an inch longer, has 2 more elements,
> yet maintains the same weight. Wanna take a guess how Tamron alchemists
> had managed to accomplish this? (Hint: it spells with a dreaded "p", and
> no, Ken, I didn't mean: "pork" :-))
>
> Oh well, at least Tamron still makes SOMETHING that fits the OM bodies,
> so in my book they're not entirely evil.
>
I had the opportunity to handle a used 90/2.5, and a new 90/2.8 MF in the same
week, although at different stores. My impression was the old 2.5 was *far*
more solid in look and feel. The 2.8 looked and felt quite "plasticky" by
comparison, although it did seem to have more substance to it than a typical AF
lens of the same physical size. ie: by today's standards, the new lens is
probably considered to be well built.
========================
Shawn Wright
Computer Systems Manager
Shawnigan Lake School
250-743-6240
swright@xxxxxxxxx
##################################################################
# This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List
# To receive the Olympus Digest send mail to: listserv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
# with subscribe olympus-digest in the message body.
#
# To unsubscribe from the current list send a message to
# listserv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx with unsubscribe olympus in the message body.
#
# For questions email: owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
##################################################################
|