Paul;
The quote below is from Dirk, not me.
But I am preparing a treatise on the subject.
george
>In a message dated 01/27/2000 5:21:22 PM Eastern Standard Time,
>geanders@xxxxxxxxx writes:
>
>> >OM 100/2 - 3.9
>> >Canon 100/2 - 4.2
>> >Minolta 100/2 - 4.4
>> >Nikon 105/2.5 - 4.2
>> >Leica Apo-Macro-Elmarit-R 100/2.8 - 4.5
>> >
>> >OM 90/2M - 4.2
>> >Leica Summicron-M 90/2 - 4.3
>> >Tokina AT-X 90/2.5 - 4.6
>> >Tamron SP 90/2.5 - 4.2
>> >Contax G Sonnar 90/2.8 - 4.4
>
>Geez, I hope the list doesn't get into an uproar over this one. They test
all
>the lenses at infinity, for starters. Why test a macro lens at infinity?
They
>also don't consider distortion, flare, or contrast in the MTF number.
>
>I like my 100/2. It gives me great images. So does my 24/2, in fact. I
don't
>even care if their prices on the used market just went down significantly.
>They aren't for sale!
>
>Paul Schings
>
>< 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 >
|