Maybe you were SMART to save your money <g>. Besides, you already have the 250
focal length.
I just checked and my font size is set at 12, as usual.
Those other tests sound good. I read the blurb on the 85-250 in the Oly Lens
handbook last nite and it says "image quality is designed to be on a par with
top-quality primes at all focal lengths." Perhaps you're proving that this is
more than marketing hyperbole?
george
ONLYOLYBW@xxxxxxx wrote:
> Hi George,
> Thanks, and yes, I do plan on some more test.
> a. 85-250 vs 135 f 2.8, 180 f2.8 200 f4, & 300 f4.5.
> b. Since I was so STUPID, that I did not buy your 250 f2, I guess I'll have to
> wait till I get smarter. May be a while!
> BW
> Ps. Did you change programs? Your response is in at least 20 points.
> gma@xxxxxxxxxx writes:
> << ONLYOLYBW@xxxxxxx wrote:
> > Hi C.H. & Shawn,
> > I guess I should jump in here. As you may remember, I did a fairly
> detailed
> > comparison between the 85 f2 & 85-250 zoom at 85mm @ f8 a few weeks ago.
> Thanks, Buddy, good test with interesting results. So 85-250 at 85 is pretty
> much
> comparable to 85/2 prime. That's one heck of a zoom, then. Maybe I'll try a
> similar test with my 65-200 @85 vs my SC 85/2 which has some cleaning
> scratches on
> the rear element. And maybe at 200 vs my SC 200/5.
>
> Do you plan to take the next step and compare the 85-250 @ 250 vs the 250/2
> <G>.
> george >>
>
> < 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 >
|