Well, of course I've got the 300/2.8. It's one of the green ones, probably
looks a lot like yours.
You were talking about the Tamron, weren't you?
Walt
--
"Anything more than 500 yards from
the car just isn't photogenic." --
Edward Weston
-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: NSURIT@xxxxxxx
>
>
> In a message dated 8/7/2006 11:19:42 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
> agschnozz@xxxxxxxxx writes:
>
> NSURIT wrote:
> > Would you let us take it to Isle Royale for the
> > Labor Day trip?
>
> I thought about that too. I recon I could leave the 200/4 at
> home to counterbalance the increase in weight.
>
> Wonder what else we could scarf out of Walt's bag-o-E-goodies?
>
> AG
>
>
> Does he have the 300mm f2.8? That would be nice. Someone else would need
> to sacrifice their backpack real estate as mine is full and I've already let
> my needs and desires decide what stays and what goes. The most significant
> is
> that with the e-1 my widest DZ that made the traveling squad is the 14-54mm.
> Oh, I will have a 21mm for the OM, but if those two aren't wide enough I'm
> in trouble. Hmm, well there is the 6X18 pinhole with about a 130 degree
> field of view. <[8^) Bill Barber
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|