And the Tokina AT-X f2.5 is even better. (many times it is at lower cost than
the Tamron due to less fame).
If you're not a "Zuiko" collector, its only a delusion that the zuiko holds
that ridiculous value - cost to results. I've had it myself to test. It only
wins in speed, and at less than a stop, its just not worth the difference
considering when it comes into play.
Even with the current economy, many on the list find spending $800 as easy as
$150 - and don't even notice it missing. The zuiko, then, becomes the choice.
If that's not you, your photos will simply be as good or better with the
Tokina/Viv/Tamron f2.5 lenses. And, many actually find the need to seriously
consider that.
Larry
danrich wrote:
> Tell me why you would buy a $800 90mm Zuiko macro over a less than half the
> cost Tamron 90mm 2.8 Macro the out performs the Zuiko 4.3 vs. 4.2 ?
> Are we nuts or are we getting into logo's or collection?
> Dan
>
> ******************************
>
> < 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 >
|