In a message dated 1/13/2003 Sean Davis writes:
<< So far i'm leaning toward the 60-300 - I'm looking for any experiences
with the 70-350 specifically. I was browsing the archives and found
that Mike Veglia had one at one time - if you read this Mike, how has
your lens performed? >>
Actually, I have had both. The SP 60-300 was my "do all" lens for close to a
decade. Almost all my work from 1999 and before was shot with that lens. It
isn't in the same class as "the big white one" but when I look back at my
older work I am always reminded just how good it was.
The 70-350 I owned was a real beater and in very ugly condition, but the
glass was still nice and clear. I got it for a bargain price and sold it
after getting the 350/2.8. That is one lens I really regret letting go of in
hindsight. Not only did I not give it enough of a chance in the brief time I
had it (and realized after selling it just how good it was), but it also was
such a beater it would have made the perfect bad weather lens when
conditions are so ugly I cringe at the thought of so much as opening my
mini-trekker. I have a OM-2S beater body for such occasions.
The comparison is apples to oranges really. The 60-300 is a good all around
lens that, for me anyway, is compact and easily hand held. The 70-350 on the
other hand is a beast, but one capable of some really amazing results and
has decent speed. At the long end I think the 70-350 is superior to the
60-300.
All that said, macro aside, I think the SP 80-200/2.8 LD with appropriate
converters is really the way to go in Tamron SP zooms. If I still had the
60-300 I would likely never use it (which I guess is why I don't have it
anymore even though it served me well for so long).
Mike Veglia
Motor Sport Visions Photography
http://www.motorsportvisions.com
< 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 >
|