Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] Your opinion on 35-70's

Subject: Re: [OM] Your opinion on 35-70's
From: Winsor Crosby <wincros@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2001 11:03:46 -0700
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


Or maybe borrow a 35-80/2.8 for a while and the 3.6 will seem so light and compact. :-)

Seriously. The 3.6 size and weight are greatly exaggerated. It is bigger than the 3.5-4.5 but it is 150 grams lighter and 3 mm longer than the 90/2 which some people love to carry around. It is lighter than the 100/2, any of the long zooms or long telephotos. Many people think that 3.6 photos have a special "look" to them which is really nice.
--
Winsor Crosby
Long Beach, California

< 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 >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz