For bokeh comparison, check this one:
http://www.dragonsgate.net/richard/gallery/tn/honey4.jpg.html
Done some times last year (April? 2002) Zuiko 90/2.
Or this one for the creamy look
http://www.dragonsgate.net/pub/sisters.jpg
BTW, I don't know if any of you have seen the movie or the promotional
poster for Spirited Away. I noticed the resemblance to it only after I took
the picture...
As I said, I can't disagree that the Tamron is about as good as the Zuiko,
picture quality-wise. So definitely the Tamron is a better buy. My car is a
10 year 2nd hand Camry. Our TV (singular), when we watch it, is a 21 inch
model. We don't even have cable because I don't want to spend $40-$60 each
month. (Then again, we have many many computers, but that's business needs)
I don't drink expensive wines or smoke cigars, I don't buy many clothes.
While we eat out a lot because I am too busy to cook most of the time, we
dine cheaply (hurray for the abundance of Asian eats in the Bay area). So
if my only sin is to waste money supporting my Zuikoholic habits, well, I
can do worse.
At 12:08 AM 2/5/2003 -0500, Larry wrote:
Looks like the Tamron has the much nicer "bokeh".
Larry
> > Richard F. Man [mailto:richard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] wrote:
> > This is was done with the Tamron 90/2.5 about 11 years ago,
> > pretty nice bokeh too:
> > http://www.dragonsgate.net/pub/renfaire.jpg
> >
> > This one was done with the Zuiko 90/2, just 2 weeks ago.
> > Haven't aged a bit :-)
> > http://www.dragonsgate.net/pub/wedding.jpg
// richard <http://www.imagecraft.com>
<http://www.dragonsgate.net/mailman/listinfo>
On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site.
[ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous
replies in your msgs. ]
< 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 >
|
