Moose, any thoughts yet on the Tamron? I agree with Scott, but have no
basis for comparison (except that both Graham and Marting were sporting the
Zuiko last weekend - it was bigger than I had expected).
--
Piers
-----Original Message-----
From: olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of ScottGee1
Sent: 26 May 2005 16:38
To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [OM] Re: Speaking of the 35-80/2.8 Zuiko....
Taking advantage of this opportunity . . .
Anyone compared the OM 35~80 to the Tamron 35~80 SP? The latter has been
one of my favo(u)rites for years and I'm wondering how much 'better' the OM
could be.
TIA!/ScottGee1
On 5/26/05, Walt Wayman <hiwayman@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> Mentioning what I wouldn't sell mine for got me to thinking. I don't read
the digital stuff all that thoroughly, so I may have missed a tidbit or two
here and there, but I don't recall any of you pixelheads talking about using
the analog Zuiko zooms on either an E-Thing or even an off-brand DSLR, like
a C-Thing. I would've thought the 35-80/2.8 Zuiko would be a natural,
considering its reputation for quality.
>
> Exactly why is that? Don't any of y'all have one? If someone would
> like to donate an E-Thing for a few months, I could check it out. :-)
>
> Walt
>
> --
> "Anything more than 500 yards from
> the car just isn't photogenic." --
> Edward Weston
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|