on 17/04/2005 01:04, John A. Lind at jalind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, wrote:
> IMHO the OM system never
> did contain a zoom lens for the "pro market,"
Indeed, and I was aware of that when I bought my first OM-2.
I seem to remember the widely used 80~200 Nikkor was /4 or /4.5, one touch
zoom; and the widely used 43~86 was variable aperture and about /3.5 IIRC,
albeit one touch.
So I was happy when the 85~250/5 appearead though their specs were not as
nice as the 35~70 /3.6 - but not bad either. The Nikkor 80~200 was still on
production and didn't feature macro either.
Those Zuiko zooms were quite their first attempt at a pro market zoom, and I
thik they almost succeeded. I said 'almost' because things were changing so
fast on those days...
It seems reasonable that third party would go ahead even of the Nikkors
since they would make them on any mount - and Tamron with the Adaptall and
cute design.
Third parties like Tamron and others (Sigma, Tokina, Vivitar S1) were, IMHO,
experimenting on how to fill that market gap during the early '80s.
In the meanwhile, Canon had a 80200/4 two touch (IIRC) that felt quite
plasticky 'though it had their unbeatable mount.
Don't know about Minolta and Pentax, neither about Leitz, but when the
Contax RTS was lauched a few yers after the OM-2 their, zooms were nothing
to write home about IIRC.
My 2 cents of an uruguayan peso (as said before, 0.00076923077 usd)
Fernando.
OT PS: just coming from a Jethro Tull concert here in Montevideo. Must have
been say 15 years since I last listened to a Jethro recording.
This Ian Anderson remains as ironic humorous as I recalled, but has improved
a lot on his musical habilities.
Well... OUTSTANDING ;^)
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|