What's it weigh?
--- Original Message ---
From: "Glen Lowry" <lowry@xxxxxx>
Date sent: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 22:13:05 -0700
> I second Skip's enthusiasm for the Tamron 80-200/2.8. I've only had mine
> a few months, but I'm very happy with the sharp images and the build
> quality--it's one serious piece of equipment. If I were a stronger man
> I'd use it more, a lot more.
>
> Glen
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Skip Williams <skipwilliams@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: haegint@xxxxxxxx <haegint@xxxxxxxx>
> Date: July 16, 1999 2:54 PM
> Subject: Re: [OM] Zoom Recommendation
>
>
> >As far as constant aperture 80-200/2.8 zooms go, you should look at
the
> >Tamron. I've had one for years and its a tack-sharp lens. They
come up
> >regularly on EBay, and with the Adaptall mount, it doesn't matter
what
> >mount is being sold, all you have to do is spring for a new OM
adaptall
> >mount. I wouldn't part with mine. BTW, it's heavy.
...
------------------
From: Tom Trottier, President, ACT Productions Inc.
infoanim@xxxxxx http://www.act.ca
+1 613 594-4829 fax +1 613 594-8944
199 Holmwood Ave, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1S 2P3
"Make it as simple as possible, but no simpler" - Einstein
< 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 >
|