You didn't mention the Tamron SP 35-80/2.8-3.8 Walt. Stupendous value for
money in my book, and mine is *not* for sale (because the market value of
less than $100 is far below its worth to me. More than adequate optical
results, with just enough reach, fast enough at maximum aperture, and
sufficiently smaller than the alternatives you mention to guarantee it stays
on the body most of the time as the 'snapshot' lens. I bought my original
version new in 1981 for more than I paid for the OM10 with 50/1.8.
On the other hand if anyone is looking for "real value" Zuiko 35-105/3.5-4.5
or Tamron SP60-300/3.8-5.6, well you know what to do (but off-list please).
Piers
-----Original Message-----
From: olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Walt Wayman
Sent: 31 May 2004 21:48
To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [OM] Re: Stop the insanity! (If you feel like it)
Moose opines:
>Some other real values: Tamron 35-105/2.8 asp. Excellent optical
performance at the same size >and weight as the 35-80/2.8 for about 1/3 the
cost.
I am a genuine and enthusiastic Tamron fan. Out of 31 lenses currently in
my cupboard that fit the OMs, only 9 are not Zuikos, and 6 of those are
Tamrons. Alas, none of them is the highly-touted 35-105/2.8 Tamron, so I,
once again, could be wrong. But the more I use it, the more I am convinced
there is no better zoom lens on this planet than the 35-80/2.8 Zuiko. I
have praised the 28-105/2.8 Tamron, both for its optical performance and its
range, and it is the lens in my one camera/one lens kit. But except for the
50/2 Zuiko, it is my honest opinion that the 35-80/2.8 Zuiko is a better
lens than any of the Zuiko (or Tamron) primes or zooms that fall within that
range. Get one if you can. If you can't, get a Tamron -- either one of
them.
--snip
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|