wincros@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>>But for those of us slightly less affluent (or equally likely those of us who
>>don't control the purse strings :-)) apart from the slightly greater range &
>>extra speed, does the 35-80 f2.8 offer significant advantages in quality over
>>it's lesser rivals?
>>
>I think so. Although I love the special quality of the images from the
>3.6, the 2.8 is as sharp or sharper than most of the primes it
>replaces. A stunning lens that Popular Photography said was the best
>zoom lens they had ever tested regardless of maker.
>
Well, I'll never likely make a comparison with the 35-80/2.8, 'cause I"m
not paying that much for it, but the Tamron asp 38-105/2.8 is optically
excellent, goes longer than the Zuiko, is the same length and weight and
has slightly better close-up ratio. It is a little fatter and takes a
non Oly standard 67mm filter, but the 38-80 is also non-standard at
62mm. And the Tamron is way cheaper.
Moose
The olympus mailinglist olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: mailto:olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
To contact the list admins: mailto:olympusadmins@xxxxxxxxxx?subject="Olympus
List Problem"
|