> Oh you can get good photographs,
> but it is quite a bit more work and never really superior to the DZ in
> that range.
In terms of contrast / vignette or ?
However, the 85/2, 90/2, and 100/2.8 are often worth
> using because the bokeh beats the DZs hands down.
>
> I've had a lot of fun with the Tamron SP 80-200 on the E-1, but I'll
> probably never use it again if I have the DZ 50-200 with me, and you
> can bet I will. I've yet to explore the bokeh issues with the DZ
> 50-200, but the Zuiko 300/4.5 has wonderful bokeh with the adapter.
Tamron 80-200mm has a better F than DZ 50-200, at least the brokeh
should be superior. If we don't count the circuit communication
between lense and E-body, will the DZ 50-200 produce better image(in
your opinion) ?
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|