I have a 300/2.8 Tamron, and I have used it both with and without
the "normal" filter in place, sometimes shooting with an empty
filter holder. I haven't been able to tell any difference. Am I
missing something? Should I look closer? Not knowing any better,
I assumed, probably out of ignorance born of thinking I know more
than I really do, that the less glass the better. Now it seems I
may be wrong. Again.
Either way, it's a great lens.
Walt
---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Sun, 04 May 2003 14:56:19 -0700
>For those who don't know, many long lenses use small filters in
>the back of the optical path, but need piece of glass in place
>always to keep the optical performance correct. They come with a
>clear or skylight filter in place when new.
---SNIP---
< 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 >
|