In a previous response to the teleconverter query that was going
around, I, somewhat intemperately, said the Tamron 300/2.8 was
sharper than the 300/4.5 Zuiko and the 400/6.3 Zuiko. Let me
qualify that a bit.
The 300/4.5 Zuiko is just about my all-time favorite telephoto
lens. It is easily hand-held and can be toted about without too
much effort and is long enough to be considered a real tele. In a
direct comparison, the 300/2.8 Tamron is sharper than the 300/4.5
Zuiko ONLY when both are firmly attached to a sturdy (meaning it
weighs more than 5 pounds) tripod. Otherwise, it's a tossup. The
Zuiko has great bokeh, in case you really care. But the Tamron,
at f/2.8 or f/4, can't be beat for indescribably dreamy, creamy
backgrounds.
As for the Zuiko 400/6.3, it's a great lens, but unless you're
willing to bolt it down on a massive tripod (meaning one even
heavier than 5 pounds) and use mirror and aperture prefire, forget
about using it with slow film. But with ISO 400 or faster film,
even if you use it on a shoulder pod, this is a really good
wildlife lens. With 800 or 1600 speed film, you can get away with
a little bit of foolishness, the kind of stuff you could never do
with the big, fast (and heavy) lenses.
That should get me back in good standing with the really serious
Zuikoholics.
Walt
< 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 >
|