I have the 200/4 and I like it. But I have always wondered about
the 65-200 and I have seen many good photos taken with one. It's a
little bigger than the prime telephoto, but I should go for that one
- for its quality and flexibility. I am sorry that I don't know what
it would be like with the x2...
Chris
At 12:47 -0700 8/8/02, Aaron Ginn wrote:
I'm looking at buying a 200mm for my OM-1n for astrowork. I had my eye on
the 200mm f/4 since it apparently performs well with a 2X teleconverter
attached to it. According to Gary's test page, however, the 65-200mm f/4
zoom seems to perform as well as the prime at the long end. Now I'm
wondering if I shouldn't consider it since I would love a nice telephoto
zoom for my Oly.
Now please don't say buy both! It's entirely out of the question right now.
I'd consider adding the zoom later for general purpose work, but if it will
perform as well piggybacked on a scope, I'll forego the prime. Also, what
kind of results could I expect with a 2X converter at 200mm?
Thanks a lot,
Aaron Ginn
--
<|_:-)_|>
C M I Barker
Cambridgeshire, Great Britain.
?
+44 (0)7092 251126
mailto:imagopus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.threeshoes.co.uk
... a nascent photo library.
< 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 >
|