Not any more, but there is a distinct difference between the two. The
35-80 is crisper, has more contrast, and the colors just seem more
vivid. And of course it is fast. It is like having a single focal
length lens on your camera. The differences in lenses when it comes
to actual pictures are usually subtle though. The 35-70/3.6 is a
great lens and it is up to you whether the difference is worth the
money, law of diminishing returns and all that. I love the images it
makes and some people prefer it.
Winsor
Long Beach, California, USA
On Jun 6, 2005, at 1:04 PM, John Nelson wrote:
> Out of interest, has anyone done (or is anyone in a position to do)
> a direct
> A/B comparison between the Zuiko 35-70mm f3.6 and the 35-80mm f2.8?
> Does the
> enormous disparity in price translate into a visible difference in
> performance? If so, under what circumstances? I'm familiar with
> Gary Reese's
> invaluable test data but would be very interested in other
> observations.
>
> Naturally this is a purely objective enquiry. My Zuikophilia is
> well under
> control. My therapist, counsellor and probation officer all agree
> that this
> is so.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|