Oben writes:
<< Could someone just give general advice on the order of quality and
ease of use (aperture ring placement etc) of the third party OM lens
manufacturers ie. Vivitar, Tokina, Tamron, etc.... >>
You are perhaps a victim of branding? If so, then so are most
consumers. In reality there is so much variation in quality within most
brand names that to select anything based on brand alone is a crap
shoot. But buyers do it on a daily basis at retail stores . . . and
the rather poor lens performance of the Olympus Infinity Stylus (a.k.a.
mju) 140 is a great case in point. But it is a best seller.
Perhaps the widest swing in quality among the above names would be
Vivitar, who, of course, never manufactured their own lens and designed
precious few of their own. We all know that Tokina and Tamron had
various lens lines which are quite different in performance. Tokina
AT-X and Tamron SP are their top lines. As is Soligor C/D.
I tried to pick out some of the top generics when I was doing my lens
tests. You would have to ponder the USA photographic magazine reviews
of the 1970s and 1980s to pick out the grain from the chaff. In there
you would fine one of my very elusive gems: the Tokina AT-X 60-120mm
f/2.8 Many of the best regarded generics get discussed time and again
in the OM List and an Archive search might tell you volumns.
<< I've been an OM purist and never ventured outside it but there are
always so many more third party lenses in pawn shops that it would be
nice to know which ones are the best and represent good buys amongst all
the junk. >>
Professional wholesale buyers already know (knowing full well you are in
Australia), so you are probably seeing what they ignore. The "as-is"
rate due to mechanical and optical problems is also going to be quite
high among this "aged" inventory of generic lenses.
Gary Reese
Las Vegas, NV
< 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 >
|