On 10/11/05, NSURIT@xxxxxxx <NSURIT@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> In a message dated 10/11/2005 6:13:14 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
> jfwilcox@xxxxxxxxx writes:
>
> What do you like about it in comparison to the Tamron?
>
>
>
>
>
> Three things:
>
> 1) It is about the same size and has about the same handling characteristics
> as the Tamron.
>
> 2) I can't tell any difference in the quality of the images produced.
>
> 3) Someone at a camera show wanted my Tamron which was "like new" more than
> I did, so the proceeds of that sale funded both my Tokina AT-X purchase and
> provided a bit more fuel for my habit. Please don't tell anyone at ZA about
> this.
>
> Perhaps the best answer might be that there was not anything wrong with
> Tamron, so it was not a decision to switch from one to another because the
> Tokina
> was better. Bill Barber
Thanks. If the two are equally good, cheaper is certainly better.
But it sounds like I might as well hang onto my Tamron for now.
Incidentally, it might be a good moment to remind folks that the
Tamron SP 80-200 can sometimes be hard to find with a native tripod
mount in good order. The good news is that the OM tripod collar can
be made to work nicely with this lens, and in fact I prefer it, though
YMMV.
Joel W.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|