Skip,
Tamron makes a 28-200 f/3.8~5.6 zoom for the Adaptall 2 mount ($269.95
plus cost of adapter minus rebate). Tokina makes a 28-200 f/3.5~5.3
zoom in OM mount for $209.90. Prices per B&H. I don't think the 24 -
200 zooms are available in anything must an AF mount.
Bill Stanke
Skip Williams wrote:
>
> You can see differences in very critical situations between today's aspheric
> element equipped lenses and yesterday's multi-element lenses. The
> differences show up especially well in situations where you see chromatic
> abberations, coma, and astigmatism, like point light sources. Not all the
> lenses, just the best.
>
> But most photographers don't exploit those characteristics or task the tools
> close to their limits. Camera shake and poor execution negates many of
> today's advantages.
>
> The one big area that has had vast improvement is the high-ratio zoom lens.
> The quality of today's 24/28-200 lens is nothing short of amazing. That's
> one lens that I wish I had as an option on my OM bodies.
>
> Personally, I question the longevity of today's plastic-glass sandwich
> concoction that incorporates the all-important aspherical surfaces. I'll
> bet many won't last. And the keep-weight-down-at-all-costs construction
> paradigm of today's consumer lenses is a poor formula for longevity.
>
> As an aside, I picked up a Canon Rebel-2000 autofocus SLR camera the other
> day, and I was FLABBERGASTED at how light it was. It couldn't have weighed
> 25 oz. (I just checked at canonusa.com: body 12.6oz, lens 6.7oz = 19.3oz !!)
> For crying out loud, it had a plastic lens mount on the body! I just hope
> that these things don't get dropped. I guess the plan is that over their
> 10-15yr life, they will either get obsoleted, destroyed, or abandoned.
>
> Skip imadinosaurandproudofit
>
> >From: ll.clark@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >Reply-To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >Subject: Re: [OM] Trouble in OM paradise
> >Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 16:38:42 -0500
> >
> >In <110.9dbdf5f.294674a0@xxxxxxx>, on 12/10/01 at 03:27 PM,
> > Doggre@xxxxxxx said:
> >
> > > But I'm skeptical that I could see any difference between photos
> > >taken with comparable lenses from the 70's era and today's newest
> > >offerings. Maybe in enlargements?
> >
> >Not even then.
> >
> >---------------------------------------------
> >les clark / edgewater, nj / usa
> >---------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> >< 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 >
> >
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>
> < 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 >
|