On Tue, 29 Aug 2000, Timpe, Jim wrote:
> Don't you also find the 250/2 just a bit too heavy and cumbersome also? I'd
> be very happy to 'un'encumber you...
Thanks, you are all too kind ;) Not having a 250/2, I cannot tell you
how I find it, let alone let you "unencumber" me. But I am open for any
list member who may want to donate one for me to conduct a long-term (say
about 70 years or thereabout) evaluation ;))
On the serious side, I do have the 200/4.0, which I am quite happy with. I
have no idea how much bigger the 250/2 would be since I have never seen
one for real.
Best regards
--thomas
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dirk Wright [mailto:wright@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2000 4:09 AM
> To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [OM] New guy fishing for info ...
>
>
>
> >
> >Uhmm, having both, I have to confess to prefering the 85/2.0. Not for any
> >rational reasons, I just "like" it. Especially for hand-held portraits,
> >where I find that 100mm is a bit "too long".
> >
> >Ohh, and no, Dirk....you cannot have my 100mm.....it too has its occatioal
> >uses ;)
> >
>
> Well, besides the fact that my tongue was firmly planted in my cheek with
> the
> previous comment, I'm *really* bummed out that you're not willing to part
> with your 100/2 for cheap.....
>
>
> --
> Be Seeing You.
> Dirk Wright
> "The only real way to look younger is not to be born so soon."
> -- Charles Schulz, "Things I've Had to Learn Over and
> Over and Over"
>
>
> < 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 >
>
< 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 >
|