The interesting thing with the C8080 is that although labelled as 28mm, it
actually goes down to 23mm. And the starting aperture is not f2.4 but
f2.8if my memory is correct.
I'm curious if anyone has ever used the C8080 with the available conversion
lenses. I'd love to hear what the comments are? As in...
a) Were there any noticeable definition drop-offs at the edges?
b) With the wide converter (assuming there is one), was the barrel
distortion more pronounced?
c) What about light dropoffs when the tele converter is used?
d) Is there a macro converter available and if so, how much closer do you
get and what is the magnification ratio?
K.
PS: Hey Keith, it's been a while....howzit hangin'...?
On 11/01/07, keith_w <keith_w@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Brian Swale wrote:
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > Just curious, especially given what was said in the last digest ( which
> > impressed me - but maybe I'm impressionable :-) ). ( Are all those
> brackets
> > in the right places?)
> >
> > Did the Olympus C 8080 come out in only the wide-zoom configuration?
> >
> > Brian
>
> That's the only one there is, Brian.
> The 35mm equivalent is 28 - 140mm.
> Not at ALL bad for any single use Zoom, I'd say.
> I regularly carry a 24mm rpime with me, with SLRs, but on the top end I
> think 135mm is tops, while 100mm is the usual tele in the bag.
>
> I'm very pleased with the coverage me C8080 gives!
> The 5x zoom and the f/2.4.
> I'd rather it would open to f/1.8 as my C5050 did, but...
>
> keith whaley
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
--
Khen Lim
XIOS Network Solutions
IBM Business Partner
+60 +16 528 6010 / 016 528 6010
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|