Tom,
I wasn't beeing specific enough, I'm sorry.
In my humble opinion, If I wanted to have a SC Version, It would have to
be a "silvernose" - If I wanted an MC version, I would go for one ith a
serial above 160000 - That way I could always easily tell them apart.
All Zuikos are great lenses, It's just that I wouldn't want an SC
without a silver nose, ok ?
bests,
Jan
Tom Scales wrote:
> No, it shouldn't be avoided! The 100/2.8 is one of the Zuikos where the SC
> version is simply wonderful!
>
> Tom
>
> From: "Jan Sturm (GMX)" <jan.sturm@xxxxxxx>
>
>
> C.H.,
> Of course you are right (excerpt from list)
> Lens Low High Average
> 100/2.0 21 $375 $535 $439
> 100/2.8 93 $77 $311 $137
>
> My deepest apologies to the list - I was posting when the doorbell rang
> - I just received my 3-Ti (See former post under "The Beauty" topic)
>
> Me slaps [self] on forehead, drooling over new toy......, grabbing film
> going outdoors shooting pics.....
>
> On the MC/SC issue with the 100/2.8, after looking at the sample page,
> it seems the Black Nose with a serial# below 160000 should be avoided
> (see below - excerpt from the sample again)
>
>
> Focal Aperture S/N Chrome/ Coating MarkedMC? Lens Name
> Length
> 100 2.8 128028 Chrome SC No E. Zuiko
> 100 2.8 129200 Chrome SC No E. Zuiko
> 100 2.8 147823 Black SC No E. Zuiko
> 100 2.8 154400 Black SC No E. Zuiko
> 100 2.8 160000 Black MC No E. Zuiko
> 100 2.8 181149 Black MC Yes Zuiko MC
> 100 2.8 187641 Black MC Yes Zuiko MC
> 100 2.8 191140 Black MC No Zuiko
> 100 2.8 195000 Black MC No Zuiko
> 100 2.8 198080 Black MC No
> 100 2.8 202500 Black MC Yes Zuiko MC
>
>
> Best regards,
> Jan
>
>
>
> < 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 >
|