>That's true. But he also used to use Sanderson 10x8 field cameras with wet
>plates when he first started out. He switched to OM1s because they were a
>major leap forward in those days and when he was using them, the equivalent
>N*k*n and C*n*n alternatives were contemporary i.e. they were just as poor.
>If Eric were still alive, would he be using an f/6.5 rack and pinion
>focusing lens or would he be using ED glass, f/4 aperture and ultra fast AF?
>I have owned all the Oly big glass and the 350mm f/2.8 is the *only* current
>Oly long lens to match anything else out there. The Zuiko 600mm is great
>optically though, sharp and contrasty but...
>
>I now own a N*k*n F5 and 500mm f/4 AFS and compared to my old OM2 and 600mm
>f/6.5..... well there is no comaprison (sadly).
>
>John
In my opinion, you are talking about two different things, first the
question if a brand offers a optically good lens and second if this lens
has all the technical possibilities, which are available today. If you
consider the second question, Olympus of course don't offer a "good"
telephoto lens, but if you look at the optical quality, they do.
Matthias
< 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 >
|