Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] 200/4 -vs- 200/5?

Subject: Re: [OM] 200/4 -vs- 200/5?
From: dreammoose <dreammoose@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 00:18:12 -0800
So if you are going to carry a BEAST, to get a fast, sharp 200mm, why not carry a Tamron SP 80-200 f2.8? You get the bonus of a sharp, fast lens at all those other focal lengths too!

You want a BEAST? Try the Tokina 150-500mm f5.6 (the Tamron 200-500 is even longer and weighs more.) But.... it makes really pretty pictures!!! 'course you need a sturdy (heavy) tripod too....

Moose

Bachofen wrote:

Yeah, I have the Viv S1 200 f3.  It is a BEAST.  Someone on the list used to 
call his 135, I think, Fat Viv.
I started calling my 200 that. It's like carrying around a fireplug.  It'll be 
cool when I get my OM/pen adapter. :^)
M.E.Bachofen


*********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********

On 12/13/01 at 6:28 PM Pandionhalietius@xxxxxxx wrote:

<< Get the Vivitar 200/3. Nice & hefty.

Tom >>

I've shot with a Zuiko MC 200/4 since 1978 and love it. Size, balance, quality. I have to slip in a vote for the Tamron SP 180/2.5 again. It has internal focus down to under 4 feet, and just amazing sharpness. The Ser 1 200/3 Vivitar is also a fantastic lens "option" and also focuses very close. Buy one or have them all and decide later...

John

< 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 >





< 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