Moose wrote:
> Yeah, I'm not much of a WA hound, but sometimes ya gotta have wide! I'm
> not sure I would be comfortable slippin' and slidin' around in a place
> like that with the 7-14 - big, heavy, bulging, exposed front element and
> lotsa $.
I was standing on a platform on the side of the gorge. The Resources
Council makes it very clear they don't want you climbing within the
gorge nor would I make the attempt with or without camera gear.
> The 11-22 is only about 23 mm eq. horizontally, although that
> may be enough, and overlaps quite a bit with the 14-54. I don't know
> what I'd do.
Buying the 7-14mm and the new E-3 would most likely still be less
expensive then buying a 5D or MkIII to use with my Zuiko 21/3.5. ;-)
But seriously, the 11-22mm might be wide enough to meet my needs. Maybe
I'll wait for Bill to switch to Can*n so I can make him an offer on his
7-14mm though I'd probably be standing in line behind Ken and Joel. :)
> Did you look at the whole series? It's meant to be seen that way. This
> particular image in not my favorite in some regards, but one may go a
> lifetime without catching a glimpse of a Water Sprite, so I had to
> include it. Did you see the Sprite? I've reposted with a roll-over to
> highlight this elusive (and ethereal?) being.
Yes, I caught it this time. :) After reviewing the whole series, "In
the Midst" was my favorite.
Richard
--
Nature's Luminance
http://bcn.net/~rlovison/index.html
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|