Phillip,
I have and love the Tamron 90/2.5 Type 1. It is a super sharp lens
with great contrast. I use it primarily for macro/close-up and I am
most pleased with it. That said, I would not be displeased if the focal
length were 15 or 20mm longer and then there's always speed isn't
there? I wouldn't particularly want the plastic Tamron f2.8's, and I
like my Type 1 with metal construction and 49mm filter size. This all
being the case, and the lens being available for prices as low as $125 I
would consider it a likely choice.
IMHO,
Rand E.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Phillip Franklin wrote:
>
> I've been thinking about aquiring a brand new or a 9 or better Zuiko
> 100mm/f2.8, a Tamron
> 90/2.8, a Tamron 90/2.5, a 100mm/2.5 Vivitar Series 1 (if still available) or
> 90mm Tokina
> 2.5 macro (also if availble). I've looked at Gary's tests and am still not
> sure what would
> be the most bang for the buck. It's primary purpose will be for outdoor
> portraits. However
> I may be using it in the studio also. Does anyone have any advice? I know
> this focal
> length has been discussed to some degree but even though I read those posts I
> still have no
> clue as what others think on this field of comparison. I was offered a
> supposedly 9 Tamron
> 90/2.5 for $150.00. I would still need to get a adapter for the OM mount.
> On the high end
> new side I would consider a new Zuiko 100/2.8 ($299.00) or the new Tamron
> 90/2.8 ($359.00).
> That's the absolute max I would consider spending. So any comments will be
> appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
> Phillip Franklin
< 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 >
|