On Sat, 20 Jun 1998, Denton Taylor wrote:
|>>This might be a good excuse to issue something commemorative.>>
|
|It's funny that you should say this because I have been thinking along the
|same lines. It is probably wishful thinking to hope for a body, but... how
|about a new lens?
|
|Someone in there loves us enough to get a new product out now and then...
|witness the 35-80 and the 2-13 screens. They proably lost a bundle on the
|zoom but probably have made a bundle on the screens.
|
|What would the votes be for one new lens, if everybody had one choice?
|
|It should definitely be a prestige lens, but relatively affordable (no 400
|2.8); should fill a glaring hole in the line; and most importantly, sell
|enough units to make Oly some real money--so that they might do it again.
|
|I vote for a 200 macro--here's why.
|
|1. It plays to Oly's main strength. In macro-photography, Oly still has the
|best line of anyone. Note that all the macro-photography lenses and
|accessories are still available new, from the 20mm to the 90mm, and
|flashes, etc.
|
|2. Because so many folk use the Oly for macro, there would be quite a
|market for a 200 macro.
|
|Waddaya think?
Not a bad idea. Maybe they could even do two 200
macros---an affordable 200/4 for most macro shooters and a
200/2.8 which is in keeping with their more recent trend of
fast macros (50/2, 90/2, etc.).
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|