I'll try to make at least a preliminary report next week. B&H shipped my ZD
50-200 today, so it should be here Thursday, if all goes as it usually does.
The Tamron works quite well with the E-1, but the ZD is considerably smaller,
weighs about half as much, has autofocus and auto diaphragm, has no aperture
restrictions, talks fluently to the Great RAW maker, and, being several years
newer and designed specifically for digital, should -- I say "should" -- be
better optically. And it has internal focusing, so the front element doesn't
rotate. I'm still going to like the Tamron, though, just not for digital
anymore.
Walt
--
"Anything more than 500 yards from
the car just isn't photogenic." --
Edward Weston
-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: wkato@xxxxxxx
>
> Has anyone compared the Tamron (which I have) to the DZ of similar
> focal length? I think I would rather spend my money on another body
> rather than more glass if these two are close in sharpness and contrast.
>
> Warren
>
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|