Nice work but it seems that many of your images are about a stop
underexposed. I thought maybe just a difference of monitor and viewing
conditions but spot checking some histograms beara out my visual impression.
Chuck Norcutt
swisspace wrote:
> I have been having so many problems at work that only now do I have time
> to reply to some posts. It was a rare occurrence but our small camera
> shop had a 70-300mm lens in stock so I took a few sample pics and then
> later some more and decided that the performance matched my 300/4.5 and
> that it was a zoom and much smaller. though tempted by the 50-200 SWD I
> wanted the extra reach.
>
> Now I have a "small" walkaround kit of E3 7-14 12-60 and 70-300 which
> covers well if not bulky, a couple of weeks ago we went to stay by the
> Bodensee, I haven't had time to add comments to the pictures but I am
> generally pleased with my collection of lenses. Hovering at the top left
> of the image and clicking on the i will display the exif data including
> focal length.
>
> http://thattimeoflife.smugmug.com/gallery/5626360_fxqN4
>
>
> IanW
>
>
>> Thanks Chris. Yes, it is the latest version of the 50-200, SWD. I
>> think this is one of the two best zoom lenses I have ever owned (the
>> other being the Leica f4/35-70mm).
>>
>
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
> Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.6.3/1611 - Release Date: 8/14/2008
> 6:20 AM
>
>
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|