I had this lens for about a year before I traded it for a 35-80/2.8 + cash. It
makes great pictures, but it's quite a big, honking lens. 82mm filter! The
zoom range was always a plus, especially the 28. It has a unusally small
focusing ring, as it's primarily an AF lens. It also grows a LOT (~3x) when
zoomed out, which makes it quite large at 105mm, especially with the tulip
hood. In general, I found that it was too large to balance well with the
svelte OM bodies. As with many newer lenses, it also felt very plasticy. At
the indoor functions where it excelled, it tended to overwhelm my subjects; I
got a lot of "Wow, look at that lens." comments, which isn't what I wanted. My
Leica M's or an OM with a small prime are much better at stealthy photos.
Skip
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Please reply to [skipwilliams at pobox.com]
Direct responses to the email address on the header may get lost
----------------------------------------------------------------->
>Subject: [OM] ...Tamron 28-105/2.8 SP .....
> From: "TMLee" <clairetm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 09:22:57 +0800
> To: <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>Dear All.....
>Anyone here own this lens (adaptall) with an OM body ? Whats the experience
>? Its quite expensive , but I seldom hear talk abt this lens.....
>
>Also , on 'yabe' ...... very rarely can find one , altho there are a handful
>of the AF versions on other mounts....
>
>Any views ? I figured the zoom range is pretty good for an all purpose lens
>(for light days ?) plus the large constant f2.8 makes it an attractive
>proposition...
>
>Rgds
>TMLee
>
>
>
>< 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 >
|