Chris, you must fly back here some time. The girls are still pretty,
they wear fewer and smaller clothes than they used to do, and there's
hardly any haggis to be seen here in Toronto. Then again, if you
wandered into Chinatown (take your pick of three) you could find some
very odd delicacies. I grew partial to duck's feet a couple of decades
ago. But we've let this thread drop, right?
I know exactly what you mean by "...city to wilderness in a couple of
heartbeats," incidentally. I'm no flyboy, but back in the 1960s flights
from England often stopped to re-fuel in Gander (sort of near Goose Bay)
en route to Toronto. I did that stop a couple of times -- as a passenger
-- and the first time was utterly astonished to see an airport looming
up out of pure wilderness all of a sudden. Nothing around it for miles,
it seemed, but snow and trees. Still have that image in my mind.
Back on topic, did you rid yourself of the 100 2.8 because it was a
lousy lens? I'm early in my understanding of Olympus lore, and I haven't
heard anyone wax poetic about that lens yet. Or slam it, for that
matter. What's the general feeling on it?
Rolf
Chris Barker wrote on 1/2/2004, 4:19 PM:
> OK Rolf. I did have a 100/2.8 , but that was about a year ago... sorry.
>
> Flew near Toronto about 11 years ago - was based temporarily in Goose
> Bay and the Escape Committee sent my navigator, another crew and me for
> a static display at Trenton in a couple of Tornados. Our arrival was
> fun - a "flyby" was "authorised", but our departure was interesting as
> we went from city to wilderness in a couple of heartbeats!
>
> Lovely place, pretty girls, pity I did not visit the centre.
< 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 >
|