Honestly, I am VERY surprised by both these statements. The Tokina should be
a great lens -- I thought it was the equal of the Tamron (anyone have
personal experience?).
As for the 28, I have to jump in with the 'which one' question too.
If it is a 28/3.5, it is a very early OM design (actually an M design).
Single-coated. Not bad, but not good.
If it is a 28/2, then I am downright shocked -- I believe this lens is the
equal of just about any 28 out there.
If it is the 28/2.8 I am still quite surprised. Perhaps the single best
bargain in Zuiko-dom, matched only by a "Made in Japan" 50/1.8 in value.
Comparing it to another 28 is a good idea. I can probably help out there if
you'd like.
Tom
From: "Olympus" <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxx>
<snip>. But my 28mm is disappointing. My Tokina 90mm
> is ok for head shots, since the image is a bit soft, but for macro use,
it's
> behind.
<snip>
> Albert
> -----
< 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 >
|