Subject: | Re: [OM] bokeh... |
---|---|
From: | Alasdair Mackintosh <alasdair.mackintosh@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Date: | 13 Nov 2000 10:12:08 +0000 |
John Hudson <xyyc@xxxxxxxx> writes: > I also had the opportunity to observe other 16"x20" b/w prints made with > Tamron 28/200mm lenses on Nikon bodies [...] The prints I made from my > 50/1.2 lens were vastly superior to the ones made from having used the > Tamron 28/200. "Vastly superior" is somewhat of an understatement! They > were just fuzzy and muddy in comparison! I was thinking about the Tamron 28/200 a couple of years ago, until I took some trial shots with one. Even on 5x7 prints the Tamron was noticeably worse than a Nikkor 50/1.4 lens. (And this was an *ugly* 50mm lens). Alasdair < 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 > |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | Re: [OM] RE: olympus-digest V2 #1957, Ian A. Nichols |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: [OM] AAAAAAAARRRGHHH!, Ian A. Nichols |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [OM] bokeh..., HI100 |
Next by Thread: | Re: [OM] bokeh..., Andrew Fildes |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |