Yet the lens is over $1000 new, and not far used. Anyone that can actually
afford that might expect those problems to have been solved. Especially when
there are other comparable non-Zuiko lenses for small fractions of the cost &
possibly better in these regards.
Larry
Joel Wilcox wrote:
> >From: Clyde Soles <csoles@xxxxxxx>
> >>Maybe he is unaware of the distortion?
> >
> >At 05:24 PM Sunday 27/05/2001, you wrote:
> >>Take note, for all that has been said about the zuiko 35 - 80 F 2.8, he
> >seems happy with it.
> >
> >
> >Realistically, would anybody notice unless they are shooting brick
> >walls? Seems like much ado about nothing to me. Now the vignetting at
> >35mm is a different issue that will crop up more often.
>
> I guess I need to restate that my shots were made at f4 (apropos the
> vignetting) and that distortion and vignetting are almost entirely gone at
> 40mm. If one has realistic expectations, it is a zoom for which no
> apologies are necessary.
>
> Joel W.
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.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 >
|