If you'll look to the archives we hashed this one out at length about
a year ago.
FWIW, I prefer the 200/5.
On Thu, 3 Aug 2000 22:13:16 -0700 (PDT), Ray Moth wrote:
>Can anyone comment on the relative merits of
>these two lenses? I'm probably going to get one or the other to expand
>my Zuiko prime lens range - I currently have 21/3.5, 28/2.8, 50/1.4,
>100/2.8. I have referred to Gary Reese's tests of both the 200/4 and
>the 200/5 and both seem quite acceptable, but the /5 is smaller and
>cheaper to buy.
-
B.B. Bean bbbean@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Bean & Bean Cotton Co/Bean Farms http://www.beancotton.com
Peach Orchard, MO
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|