James Michael King wrote:
>no problem its not a bad lens. On ebay in the uk it is not popular because
>of its size and weight.
>
Yes, we're stronger here... :-)
> Very good condition ones can be picked up for
>about 50 pounds or less.
>in macro mode it does not have quite the sharpness of the Tamron 90mm but
>unlike the 90 (which can only go 2:1) the 60-300 will focus closer and go
>1:1
>
Point of order. It goes further than the 90, but to 1:1.55, not all the
way to 1:1.
It's not for flat field like the 90, but great for typical nature macro
shots where only part of the frame will be in focus anyway. I don't
rememer which 90mm was being talked about, but I can say the 90/2.5 has
a very flat field, as a true macro lens should.
> I find it quite difficult to accurately focus mine but my father has
>used two for aircraft photography for years and is happy with them.
>
I don't find mine hard to focus.
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|