I second that emotion! The 35-70/3.5-4.5 is simply a work of art in itself,
outstanding lens to say the very least.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Scales" <tscales@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2000 10:07 PM
Subject: Re: [OM] OM: 35-70 lens
> Ooh ooh, I know the answer to this one. (Did I sound like Horshack,
> huh,huh,huh...ok, so maybe that only means something to 40 year
Americans.)
>
> 35-70/3.5-4.5. No question. Just don't get snookered with the 3.5-4.8,
> which is a Cosina and, well, not as good.
>
> The f/4 and f/3.6 are excellent lenses, but the 3.5-4.5 is smaller and
> lighter and just a wonderful little lens.
>
> Course, I'm behind in reading, so this has probably been answered by 40
> other people, unless they're caught up in the gun thread.
>
> <snip>
>
>
> > At the risk of starting a firestorm: excluding the 35-80/2.8, which is
> the
> > best of the short focal length telephoto lenses (35-70)? Ignore the
> > differences in filter size.
> >
> > Charlie Geilfuss
> >
_________________________________________________________________________
> > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
http://www.hotmail.com.
> >
> > Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
> > http://profiles.msn.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 >
>
< 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 >
|