You forgot the people who like the lens, but are mystified by the difference in
feel between this lens and most of the other lenses in the line. It's like it
was made on a different manufacturing line or something. That doesn't diminish
it's performance, it's just.....different.
Skip
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Please reply to [skipwilliams at pobox.com]
Direct responses to the email address on the header may get lost
----------------------------------------------------------------->
> From: Jan Steinman <Jan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>There's no consensus. It seems to be split into three camps:
>
>1) I have it, and it is one of my favorite lenses. You'll have to pry it from
>my cold, dead hands.
>
>2) I don't have it, but would kill to pry it from someone else's cold, dead
>hands.
>
>3) I'm sure it's a lovely lens, but it is just too expensive. I think my
>Kubicron 92mm f2.65 takes ALMOST as good a picture, and it only cost $39.95 at
>a K-Mart blue light special.
>
>There is no "group 4" of folks who have anything significantly bad to say
>about it.
>
>--
>: Jan Steinman -- nature Transography(TM): <http://www.Bytesmiths.com>
>: Bytesmiths -- artists' services: <http://www.Bytesmiths.com/Services>
>: Buy My Step Van! <http://www.Bytesmiths.com/van>
>
>< 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 >
|