I have shot stuff with the 300/2.8 Tamron and the 1.4X-A
teleconverter that, except for the increased image size, is
indistinguishable from stuff shot with the 300/2.8 without the
1.4X-A. Can't say the same for the 2X-A. It's really not even
close. I've had the same experience with the 300/4.5 Zuiko and
the 400/6.3 Zuiko. But -- blasphemy to follow -- the Tamron is
sharper than either Zuiko, so that's why I use it as a reference.
Walt
---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: "C.H.Ling" <chling@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2003 23:22:44 +0800
>The 1.4x was built for big glasses, like 180/2, 250/2 and
>350/2.8, so to match the price of them the 1.4x must be
>expensive :-)
>
>The 2x was built for cheap slow lens (except 100 and 135 f2.8
>which are not too slow), such as 100/2.8, 135/2.8, 200/4, 200/5,
>100-200/5... ect. To match with such lenses the selling price
>cannot be too high.
>
>C.H.Ling
>
< 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 >
|