Scott Peden wrote:
> BTW, when Jan posted this, I fully understood why I wasn't as happy as I
> wished with all the other lens's I had purchased, though I had a great deal
> on almost all of them, the only crisp shots I had were with Zuiko lens's.
>
A great deal depends on how well the purchase works. The trick here is
to know which third party lenses are good.
There are, in fact, many really excellent third party lenses for OM
mount, a few exceeding the equivalent Zuiko in performance and quite a
few providing excellent performance in focal lengths that Oly never made.
As a generality, the SP line from Tamron, the AT-X line from Tokina and
pretty much any Kiron are excellent. The Tamron SP 70-200/2.8, for
example, is simply one of the best lenses in that focal range ever made.
And I have the Tamron Asp 35-105/2.8 in preference to the legendary
Zuiko 35-80/2.8 for equal or near equal ( don't want to piss anybody off
here) performance with greater reach. And I have a particular soft spot
for the SP 35-80/2.8-3.8 for its modest size and weight, excellent
performance and special close focus/macro capabilities.
The Tokina 24-40/2.8 is a better lens than the Zuiko 28-48/4, albeit
bigger and heavier. And lenses like the Kiron 28-210 zoom provide Zuiko
quality performance in a range Oly never made.
On the other hand, as you appear to have discovered, there are a lot of
mediocre and poor lenses out there in used land. If looking for a
particular focal length and/or type of lens, or when considering a
purchase, try asking here. You won't believe how much collective
knowledge there is.This reference may also help
<http://web.archive.org/web/20060101085618/medfmt.8k.com/third/cult.html>.
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|