Both are nice but what?s the real world difference between
an F/5 and a F/4?... The F/4 with 55mm ring is a compact
and useful telephoto. What is so special about a 200
F/5?it's harder to find??? So what!
On Thu, 6 Jun 2002 21:02:27 -0500
"Gary Edwards" <garyetx@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The 200/5 has been discussed a number of times on the
list. Few have
anything bad to say about it. I love mine, but lately
I've been biting the
bullet and hauling the 180/2.8 with me. I took them both
on my last long
trip, the 200/5 for long walking excursions, the 180 for
work closer to
base.
None on the 'bay or at KEH right now. They do appear
periodically, and
there have been several offered on the list. I think
it's a buy at the
quoted 25 0.000000e+00ss than the f/4.
Gary Edwards
----- Original Message -----
From: <voop@xxxxxxxxx>
To: "Zuikoholics Anonymous" <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 5:43 PM
Subject: [OM] Zuiko 200/5 ?
Just came to think...I've actually never seen one of
subj. Neither new
nor second hand nor in the hands of some other
zuikoholic. I don't seem to
recall it being discussed on the list either.
< 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 >
|