Speaking of the 180/2.8, I thought 7520979298 might sneak under the
radar as the description was bland and a bit off, but it's gone up fast
since I placed a watch on it last night. Darn.
Earl
jowilcox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>Quoting Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
>
>
>
>>Yup. Of course the photographer didn't have any part in
>>it, eh?
>>
>>
>
>Thanks, Chuck, for the implied compliment, though it's a bit
>like stealing candy from a baby with my lovely big window
>over the breakfast nook and the tolerance of my bride for
>Bogens on the table top. :)
>
>I just meant that the E-1 +180/2.8 is another one of the
>more congenial couplings of the old and new, I gather like
>the E-1 and 200/4 (my old one of which Schnozzy now owns and
>I miss it horribly at times with its beautiful silver nose).
>But the 180/2.8 is some solace for that. :)
>
>I continue to be impressed with focusing on the E-1 screen.
>I know it's not as great as with my OM-2S or OM-4 and
>2-series screen, but I honestly don't find myself yearning
>for the wonderful OM viewfinder as I thought I would. I'm
>extremely lucky to have a good focusing eye and the diopter
>adjustment is a critical factor to get right. (In my
>opinion, the adjuster on the dioper is a little too easy to
>change by casual bumping -- yet another thing that needs to
>be checked from time to time.)
>
>Joel
>
>
>
>>Chuck Norcutt
>>
>>Joel Wilcox wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Nothing spectacular, but I've been trying to catch some
>>>
>>>
>>very shy orioles
>>
>>
>>>that are nested somewhere close by. The females are a
>>>
>>>
>>little less
>>
>>
>>>shy. This is either a female or a not-quite-mature
>>>
>>>
>>male:
>>
>>
>>>http://soli.inav.net/~jdub/day/day42.html
>>>
>>>I thought the Zuiko 180/2.8 acquitted itself
>>>
>>>
>>honorably.
>>
>>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|