Yes, John, thanks. These are my sentiments too. (you forgot to factor in the
"but I need the $$$" statement, but that really should not play a part in Zuiko
decisions, should it?
I've got the auto tube, maybe if my $$$ situation turns around I'll look for the
135.
george
John Petrush wrote:
> >George <gma@xxxxxxxxxx> agonized aloud.......
> >
> >
> >>I'm also thinking of selling my 90
> >>macro cause I've now got an 80F/4 and a 50F/2 and I'll keep either the
> >>85 or the 100 so I think the 90 will be superflous (Oh, and I need the
> >>$$$). Can somebody please talk me out of that one?
> >>
> >George,
> >
> >Hang on to the 90 macro, its usefulness is beyond measure. The 80F/4 needs
> >extension tubes or bellows to be useful and does not do infinity well. The
> >50F/2 (lovely piece of glass, isn't it <g>) is terrific when you can get
> >close, but has its limitations in working diatance. The 90 mac steps up to
> >extend the working distance range without loss of magnification or lens
> >speed. Such a deal! What you *really* need to be doing is hunting down a
> >135mm macro and a set of auto-tubes.
> >
> >John P
>
> < 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 >
< 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 >
|