My wife needed a p&s to replace a C***n which recently died (after
6yrs).
The recent discussion of a Take Anywhere camera was a great reference.
In the end I purchased a Stylus Epic QDX as the gold appearance looked
like something she'd accept while the 2.8 was something I could live
with.
I asked the sales staff at the local store (who happened to be big OLY
fans)
which lens was better - i.e. in terms of QUALITY, not speed - the 3.5 on
the
original black body Stylus or the 2.8 on the Stylus Epic - they did not
know.
Any thoughts? I have searched the archives but have not found an
answer.
Also - somehow we entered into a conversation about the 100 2.0 and 2.8
for the OM. One of these guys had owned the 2.0 and said that he found
it
too sharp for portrait work. I've heard nothing but praise for these
items from
this group. Comments?
Thanks to all for the wonderful posts - especially about the IS series -
thanks
to Ken, Per, George A and the other IS3 crowd, I too own an IS3. Like
many others on this list I have a young daughter who plays soccer. This
camera and the budget 300mm add-on was perfect. I took pictures of all
members of my child's team - The Blue Rockets - (We are still in the
tikes league).
At the end of the season I presented each of the parents a photo album
of
their kid playing soccer. I was the only person who took pictures. It
was a great
suprise for all. My only problem with the IS3 is that it makes me lazy
- and my
OM2n isn't used as much as I'd like.
Cheers
Scott
< 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 >
|