Well, that's one I've passed by. I'd love to believe it's magic, but
would have to see some comparisons with the Tamron 35-105/2.8 asp, a
lens produced a bit later and using an aspherical element as well as LD
glass.
I"ve been really impressed with the performance of the Tamron and very
much value the longer fl. I seem to have a 'tele' eye, and the extension
from 80-105mm is more important to me than going from 35 down to 28mm
would be, the reverse of some of you, I know. And it adds the fl without
any penalty in size or weight. I know John Lind bought one and liked it
so much he promptly bought a second. Neither lens is any use for close
up focusing, a real shame, which leads me to often carry the
35-105/3.5-4.5. It's no macro lens, but at least gets closer.
I'm also mindful of Walt's comparison tests of the Tamron SP 90/2.8 and
the Zuiko 90/2, where he really couldn't pick out a difference in
slides. Of course, I had to have a 90/2 anyway................. Maybe I
won't need a 35-80/2.8 until somebody proves it's no better than
something else? :-)
Moose
Skip Williams wrote:
>This was the last lens developed for the OM-System..... I wouldn't put it up
>against the 50/2, 90/2, or 100/2, but it holds its own with other lenses.
>
>Results are very, very nice, and you can pick out images with this lens over
>lesser-quality zooms in transparancies or large prints. Superb resolution,
>color saturation, and 3-d effects are evident, IME. I wish that it went
>wider, but the technology didn't exist then to make 24mm or 28mm constant
>aperture zooms.
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|