>From: wavegirl <wavegirl@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: Re: [OM] Tamron Adapral And OM-4t
>
>Speaking of Tamron, some of their lenses are looking pretty good these days.
>I used to be a proponent of only buying Zuiko lenses for my Oly, but have
>been looking hard at some of the Tamron stuff for when I next have a bit of
>money. Anybody have any experience with/comments about them, especially
>compared to proper Zuiko kit?
>From personal experience:
90/2.5 macro (49mm filter version): decent substitute for the Zuiko 90 at
a much lower cost (for macro work, anyway).
300/2.8 (green IF model): great lens, very sharp with high contrast - used
examples <$1000 on the bay.
400/4: very great lens, only slightly larger and takes same hood and
filters as the 300/2.8. Image quality seems to be similar my Zuiko 250/2.
For me, the best Tamrons fill the gaps where Zuikos generally don't have a
matching entry.
The 80-200/2.8 has already been mentioned; the 17mm also has a good
reputation.
I had a Tamron 500/8 mirror that I quickly unloaded when I picked up my
Sigma 500/4. I also have the Tamron 350/5.6 mirror that never gets used.
The mirror lenses don't thrill me as they are slow and lacking in contrast.
A good economical solution if you need the focal length on a budget, though.
Steve Troy
< 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 >
|