John...I tried the 67mm f/3.5 version on my OM1n and had good results
especially in the macro mode...The problem is its size and weight...I much
prefer the OM 65-200/f4...The 62mm is smaller and I believe it to be a later
model...The Series 1 is a good lens...I'm more familiar with the 67mm
version having used it and I've noticed e*bay prices vary from $40. to $125.
that were rated ex+ to mint...The owner of the used camera store that I
frequent seemed to like the 67mm more, but gave me no specifics on
why...Marty
-----Original Message-----
From: Giles <cnocbui@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thursday, November 29, 2001 2:54 PM
Subject: [OM] Fwd: Two versions of the Vivitar Series I 70-210mm macro-zoom
lens
>
>From: "John Alexander Sheakley" <EMail2John1@xxxxxxxx>
>To: <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: Two versions of the Vivitar Series I 70-210mm macro-zoom lens
>Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 13:30:30 -0800
>
>
>One version has a 67mm filter ring with a ring to switch to macro
>mode located near the aperture ring. The other version has a
>62mm filter ring and does not have a ring to switch to macro
>mode.
>
>Was one version a prototype of the other, i.e., the later version
>is an improved version? If the condition is equal for two lenses
>(one of each version), which lens commands a higher price and
>why?
>
>EMail2John1@xxxxxxxx
>John Sheakley
>P.O. Box 1332
>Union City, CA 94587-6332
>(510) 494-8775
>
>
>< 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 >
|