>>>Olympus should do a 300/4 APO, an updated 180/2.8, an updated 200/4,
>a 70-210/2.8 or 80-200/2.8, a 400/5.6 APO at the minimum. They could
>probably contract with Sigma to supply the opics for a 70-210/2.8
>300/4, and 400/5.6. those three along along with the fast glass
>series of teles would fix Olympus' tele offerings. If they wanted
>to compete for bird photographers money, a 600/4 added
>to the fast glass series would be helpful. >>
>
>We could also use a 200 macro, and a couple other fancy zooms, like Canon
>L, say 17-35. Wouldn't a 17-35 2.8, 35-80 2.8, and a 80-200 2.8 be nice?
>
>
>Regards,
>
>
>Denton Taylor
>_______________________________
I think we already have the 35-80 2.8.
I thought the 300/4.5 was built with low dispersion glass which is what APO
is all about, making all the colors focus in the same place.
The rest sounds great! Especially the lenses that a lot of people might
buy. I am not too warm to the idea of a 3d party supplier. It seems to me
that if a few new lenses came out that we and Oly would like the reviews in
the mags to say, "Wow! Great lenses. Olympus is still with us".
- not "Olympus has supplied some rebadged lenses as a sop to the dwindling
ranks OM enthusiasts."
Winsor
Winsor Crosby
Long Beach, California
mailto:wincros@xxxxxxxxxxx
< 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 >
|