Here is a quote/clip from a 1998 archive related to the Tokina 35-70 2.8,
from a Kenneth Norton:
>What do you think about the Tokina. I recently bought one for 160 DM (95
US
>Dollar) and I think, you can use the aperture of 1:2,8 succesfully, but
not
>at close distances. Do you know the number of elements/groups of this lens
>and the original new price?
As far as number of elements and price, I can't help you there. I've had
mine for a while and bought it at wholesale price. As far as using it wide
open? I use it at 2.8 at all extremes with no problems. My only problems
with the lens is that it is only 35-70 (instead of 28-80) and the bokah
isn't as pleasing as with zuiko primes. Also, any stars caused by the iris
are a bit unusual as compared to most lenses. I can identify every single
shot taken with this lens when there is a bright point source of light in
the frame.
Regardless, I've been going through my images putting together a
multi-thousand submission to a stock agency and have been surprised that
the majority of images I'm submitting were taken with this lens! My
earlier work was dominated by the 100/2.8 but now it's either the 24/2.8 or
35-70 zoom with random images from the shift lens and 100/2.8. Of course,
for wedding, party and people work (events) the AT-X 35-70/2.8 is my money
lens. $95 USD is a fair price for this lens and an extreme value.
Ken
Kenneth E. Norton
Image66 Photography
I have the same lens (AT-X 357 35-70 f2.8), but have not managed to use it
yet!
Roger Key
James Burris wrote:
Hello,
Until I can get my hands on a Zuiko 35-70mm f3.6 I have an opportunity to
pick up one of these lenses. Can anyone comment on the quality? I am
suspecting excellent given the reputation of the 80-200mm f2.8.
How about the 24-40mm?
Thanks,
James Burris
< 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 >
|