Subject: | Re: [OM] DZ 70-300mm |
---|---|
From: | Mike Lazzari <watershed@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Date: | Fri, 30 Jul 2010 09:10:38 -0700 |
> > so the 50-200+1.4X gives me much the same range, same effective aperature at > the short end but a stop faster at the long end, and I've got the 50-200 > range covered too. > I forgot to add that the 70-300 gets pretty soft close to 300mm. Too soft for me. May be partly due to the slow shutter speeds required or that it doesn't balance well on a tripod. In any event that makes it a 70-250 for critical use. The 50-200 + xx beats the pants off it at the long end. And of course costs 3 times more. One plus for the 70-300 not previously mentioned is its macro capability. Mike -- _________________________________________________________________ Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/ Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/ |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | Re: [OM] Requiem for print photography, politics, Rick Beckrich |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: [OM] DZ 70-300mm, Chuck Norcutt |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [OM] DZ 70-300mm, Wayne Harridge |
Next by Thread: | Re: [OM] DZ 70-300mm, Chuck Norcutt |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |