Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] Re: olympus-digest V2 #838

Subject: [OM] Re: olympus-digest V2 #838
From: gpalman@xxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1999 06:38:51 -0500
Glenn,
You've just set yourself up for the infamous camera body failure on 
the trip of a lifetime<g>. Take two bodies. Afterall, the beauty of the 
OM is its compactness. --Greg

Date sent:              Fri, 26 Mar 1999 01:02:19 -0800
From:                   owner-olympus-digest@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (olympus-digest)
To:                     olympus-digest@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject:                olympus-digest V2 #838
Send reply to:          olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

> At 10:05 PM 24/03/99 -0800, Glen Lowry wrote:
> >
> >[snip]
> >
> >>I love wide angles and was looking at picking up a 24/2, 28/2, or 35/2--
> and
> >>possibly a 21.  And I was hoping, I might get some advice from those of
> you
> >>using these lenses.  Are there any of these fast wides (SC/MC) that I
> should
> >>steer clear of?  I've seen Gary Reese's test page--a real treat--but
> noticed
> >>that there was no listing for the 28/2; so what's the skinny on this lens.
> >
> >I've got nothing objective to say about this lens, but I own it (the MC
> version), and subjectively, couldn't be more pleased.  My wife and I are
> going to France in the near future, and she's insisted that I *not* bring
> along every lens in the stable, so the 28/2.0 and the 100/2.0 are getting
> the nod, along with one body (either the 2S or the 4).



< 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 >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • [OM] Re: olympus-digest V2 #838, gpalman <=
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz