Thanks, Denton,
I'm learning all kinds of things about these Konica (and Voigtlander) lenses.
Still can't make up my mind to take the Oly plunge, though. Sure would be
lighter than my Nikon, and from all reports, the lenses are superior. Hope to
hear from you again.
John
Denton Taylor wrote:
> At 05:43 PM 1/21/00 -0500, you wrote:
> > there are two main reasons I am considering Olympus. One is how
> > > small and light they are; the main one is the reputation for optical
> > > quality. I doubt that Konica optics would be up to Oly (or Leica
> > > standards).
> >
> >Konica optics are excellent. . . .some are superior. But as a total
> >system, it pales next to Olympus.
>
> It's really hard to compare Oly SLRs to a rangefinder like Konica, Leica M,
> Contax G, etc. They are very different kinds of systems. And I bet the new
> Konica lenses will be state of the art. Remember the original 35/2 Hexar
> lens was considered comparable to a Summicron, which it was a copy of.
>
> ________________________________
> Regards,
> Denton Taylor
>
> Photogallery at www.dentontaylor.com.
> Panoramas and Immersive Imaging at
> www.threehundredsixty.com
> Join the RolleiSLR list at www.rolleislr.com
>
> < 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 >
|