Unlike some others here, who shall remain nameless, I kept my 300/4.5 Zuiko
even after getting the 300/2.8 Tamron. It quickly became part of my E-1 kit
and remained there until I got the 50-200/2.8-3.5 ZD and the EC 1.4
teleconverter. Although this combination is 20mm shorter than the 300 Zuiko,
it does have the advantage of auto-focus and is better wide open.
Now, if I were to set up a sturdy tripod AND use a 1.4X or 2X teleconverter,
I'd go with the big Tamron, but for toting and hand-holding, the 300/4.5 Zuiko
is a definite winner and maybe, just maybe, the optical equal, or very close,
to the big Tamron. I was quite impressed with it on the E-1 and would still be
happily using it if I hadn't -- well, I did what I did, and I'm not at all
unhappy, but anybody with an E-1 and a 300/4.5 Zuiko shouldn't be unhappy
either. There's proof of why on Schnozz's website.
Walt
--
"Anything more than 500 yards from
the car just isn't photogenic." --
Edward Weston
-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: AG Schnozz <agschnozz@xxxxxxxxx>
--snip--
>
> On the E-1, the 300/4.5 has a similar FOV as a 600mm on an OM. I
> used a borrowed 600/6.5 (more chrome than a 62 Cadillac), and
> found it to be extremely difficult to work with and it was hard
> to get vibration free shots. With the 300/4.5 on the E-1,
> vibration problems are a thing of the past. I never had a
> single picture ruined by shutter vibration.
>
> There were a few other pictures taken with Joel's 300/4.5 which
> are already among my favorites. Sharpness with the E-1 is
> simply not an issue.
>
--snip--
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|