Subject: | [OM] Re: 14-45mm vs 50mm 3.5 macro |
---|---|
From: | swisspace <swisspace@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
Date: | Thu, 09 Feb 2006 13:28:27 +0100 |
looks like you have a bad example, I have had two and they have both been okay, in fact I thought it was the 14-54 which was more prone to quality issues. It's just a good job we have our old om zuiko's ;-) > The kit lens is not only soft but looks muddy as well. > AndrewF > ============================================== List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx ============================================== |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | [OM] 14-45mm vs 50mm 3.5 macro, Andrew Fildes |
---|---|
Next by Date: | [OM] Re: 14-45mm vs 50mm 3.5 macro, Jez Cunningham |
Previous by Thread: | [OM] 14-45mm vs 50mm 3.5 macro, Andrew Fildes |
Next by Thread: | [OM] Re: 14-45mm vs 50mm 3.5 macro, Jeff Keller |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |