Hi Walt:
..and you don't refer to your 11.8110236 inch telephoto (300mm) or use
1.3779528 inch film either, you have metriculated
Gord
----- Original Message -----
From: "Walt Wayman" <hiwayman@xxxxxxx>
To: <olympus@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, December 17, 2004 10:04 AM
Subject: [OM] Re: tamron 80 - 200 LD F 2.8 reasonable price?
> Sorry. I'm a Murkin and I tend to forget that some of the rest of the
> world is out of step and uses strange measurements. Re-weighed on the
> same electronic scale, which I didn't even know until just now is
> switchable between lbs./ozs. and grams, the same assembly weighs 1485
> grams, whatever that translates to in other units. Might that be 1.485
> kilos? :-)
>
> My concession to the metric system hasn't gone beyond getting a couple of
> sets of metric wrenches.
>
> Walt
>
> --
> "Anything more than 500 yards from
> the car just isn't photogenic." --
> Edward Weston
>
> -------------- Original message ----------------------
> From: jking@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>> > Weight: Mine weighs 3 lbs. 4 oz. with tripod collar, OM Adaptall mount,
>> > hood and lens cap. I actually just now weighed it.
>> :-( whats that in grammes and kilos? -
>>
> [snip]
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|