| Subject: | RE: [OM] 200/4 vs. 2X-A (Was 100/2 vs. 85/2 in sharpness) |
|---|---|
| From: | andrew fildes <afildes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 13 Jul 2001 11:22:54 +1000 |
Snakes, mate, snakes! AndrewF >That's good to hear! I'm still not sure what I would need 400mm for, >but you never know.... > ><snip> >I have the 200/f4 and the 2X-A, and the combination is >very sharp! > > < 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] Heads-up - 50/3.5, low BIN, andrew fildes |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | [OM] thread digressed into OT mail ranting, Mike |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [OM] 200/4 vs. 2X-A (Was 100/2 vs. 85/2 in sharpness), frieder . faig |
| Next by Thread: | [OM] Maco IR film, Eric Pederson |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |