Since I don't think the difference between 150 and 200mm to be that
significant, I used a Tamron 70~150 f/3.5. The version I have is
compact enough that is uses 49mm filters. Very good optical
performance and solid mechanically. Hood is built in.
Another advantage -- clean copies can be found for ~US$60 with adapter.
FWIW/ScottGee1
On 9/19/05, Wayne Culberson <waynecul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> > Is there another brand, in this range that would be comparable?
> >
> > Thanks, Darin.
>
> Item # 7546967455 on the auction site is an excellent alternative, but
> without the same range. This one is the Kiron-made one, branded Vivitar,
> with a 2x included in the auction. It already went by once without a bid,
> but I see it has an opening bid this time. (No connection to this auction)
>
> I had one of these, until my son confiscated it. Since then I've replaced it
> with the Kiron 70-150/4, which appears to be the same lens. They are really
> excellent in quality, and have a very good macro or close-focusing feature.
> The drawback is a 52mm filter size.
>
> If you need the about the same range as the Zuiko 65-200/4, the Kiron
> 70-210/4 gets excellent reviews. Unlike many other 3rd-party lenses, most of
> the Kiron-made lenses are praised anywhere you read about them. I have the
> 80-200/4.5 version, which is excellent as well, but a bit slower.
> Wayne
>
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|