In a message dated 12/6/2001 Mark Lloyd writes:
<< well of course I know that, but if you had 7000 bucks
and could only spend it on new Zuikos. I wouldn't get
a 250/2 or 350/2.8. I'd get a 24 shift, a 21/2, and
18/3.5 or 16/3.5, a 50/2 macro, a 90/2 macro and if
anything was left over a 135/2.8 and 300/4.5. >>
It's a different strokes for different folks kinda deal. For my
requirements I can see that in the very near future all I will likely
shoot with anymore on film with be the 350/2.8 and an ultra-wide to be
named later (since I don't have one yet). Maybe a little with the Tamron
80-200/2.8 still (though last week I lugged it around all day and never
did use it). The E-10 will cover the rest of my requirements pretty
well. Any of my Zuikos except that 350/2.8 and 1.4XA could be let go of
without too much heartache now, but that 350? It's a keeper.
You do make a valid point though...on a budget the Tamron 300/2.8 and
400/4 are exceptional alternatives and less expensive. I just happened
to get lucky (because I am very much on a budget).
Mike Veglia
Motor Sport Visions Photography
http://www.motorsportvisions.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 >
|