Why does everybody trash the Tamron 80-200/2.8 tripod mount? It definitely is
not the best piece of engineering I have ever seen and is not as well designed
as the tripod mounts on the Zuikos, but it ain't all that bad either. I have
no problem with mine.
I think way too many folks tighten down their tripod mounts way too much, and
that sort of foolishness can break the Tamron mount. I keep all tripod
collars, Zuikos included, loose enough to push around the lens without having
to back off the clamping-down knob at all. That way, you can get the
sharp-edged foot out of the palm of your hand when hand-holding, or you can
rotate the camera quickly when it's on a tripod without having to diddle with
the tripod head.
Walt, who likes to keep things loose
--
Everybody has a photographic memory. Some people just don't have any film.
>
>
>
> >
> >
> > tscales@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >
> > >All are excellent lenses. I would put them in order:
> > >
> > >1) Tamron 80-200/2.8. One of the best zooms ever and the best for OM. By
> > >far. Big and Heavy
> > >
> > I agree except for the 'by far' part. The Tokina AT-X 80-200/2.8 is very
> > close to as good. If the Tamron didn't exist, the Tokina would have the
> > rep. About the same size, but significantly lighter. Much better tripod
> > mount design.
> >
> If the Tokina tripod mount is better than the mount on the Tamron I would
> hate to see the mount on the Tamron. I have the Tokina and that is the
> only thing that I don't like about it. It seems a little flimsy in
> comparison to the one on the Olympus 300 4.5. The other thing would be if
> it focused closer. But still one of my favorite lens.
> John Gettis
> >
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|