Hi Tom,
Thanks for you comment on that. As for the 3.5-4.5, our thoughts about this
lens are the same. I have not owned other lenses in this range (apart from a
28-70 Danubia, but that does'nt count) I have also considered a 35-80/2.8, but
I have so far not succeded in finding one and do not want to spend so much.
Your theory that the 3.5-4.5 is a "girlie" lens almost made me ROFL, but you
have a point there. Although God (or whoever is responsible for my pool of
genes) supplied me with a set of piano-player's fingers, I sometimes mistakenly
change focal length together with the aperture.
I probably can make the shop where I saw the 3.6 borrow this lens to me. At
least they offer the full right of return for a short period.
Best regards
Bernd
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Scales" <tscales@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 3:50 PM
Subject: Re: [OM] Your opinion on 35-70's
> Bernd,
>
> Owning or having owned every Zuiko in the range, I'll throw in my thoughts.
> I currently own the 35-70/3.6, 35-80/2.8 and 35-70/3.5-4.5. Oh, and the
> 35-105/3.5-4.5. Owned the 35-70/3.5-4.8 briefly (before I understood). My
> theory was the girls would use the little lens (35-70/3.5-4.5) and I would
> use one of the 'bigger' ones. Hasn't happened. The most used lens is the
> 35-70/3.5-4.5. Now I'm not saying the 3.6 isn't a better lens; it is. I
> just prefer the light weight of the little guy and am willing to accept the
> compromise. Of these, if I could only have one, I'd have the 35-70/3.5-4.5,
> even considering the 35-80.
>
> Heck the only reason I own the 3.6 is a just got a near perfect one and
> don't have the heart to sell it.
>
> If I was you, I'd try to borrow the 3.6 from someone and compare them. I
> think you'll stick with what you have.
>
> Tom
>
>
>
> Hi there,
>
> A topic which may have been discussed earlier, but I'll dare to put it up
> again.
>
> I've been using my 3.5-4.5 35-70 for quite a long time now with rather
> satisfying results, but recent comparisions with my primes have shown me
> some lack of sharpness.
>
> Now as I've seen a used 3.6 for sale, I wonder whether it would be a good
> buy. Price is just over 200 USD. Gary Reese has gotten better test results
> with the 3.6, but on the other hand the small size of the 3.5-4.5 is rather
> important for me. However, I am willing to sacrifice compactness (together
> with the $$$) for better performance, keeping the 3.5-4.5 for occasional
> shootings. What do you think? A reasonable thought or a strike of
> Zuikoholism?
>
> Regards
>
> Bernd Möller
>
>
>
> < 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 >
>
>
< 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 >
|