Moose wrote:
>>
> Paul has clearly spent more hours testing than I have. I do suggest,
> however, that you take results from one person, one testing method and
> one example of each lens with a slight grain of salt. Nothing against
> Paul, me, PopPhoto, Gary, PhotoDo, etc., but lens testing is a tricky
> business and there is sample variation in lenses.
That's true, and I was thinking the same thing. But at the same time, it
does indicate to me that the Vivitar 90/2.5 is a very good lens, so good
that is probably for me the practical equivalent of the Zuiko 90mm for how
I'd use it. On lens sample variation, one never knows if the lens has been
dropped or has some other negative history. Mine had a loose mount, but I
doubt if it has any effect on picture quality now that I've tightened it.
Still, one always wonders how it came about to be loose. I should borrow my
son's 20D some day and do some testing of my own. I know it's not full
frame, but it would satisfy me.
> I'm assuming that the Viv is the Tokina 90/2.5 in drag. Vivitar never
> was a manufacturer, rather marketing lenses made by others. Even the
> legendary original 70-210, although designed for them in the US, was
> made for them in Japan by Kiron. As there were only two 90/2.5 lenses
> made by actual manufacturers, it has to be either the Tamron or the
> Tokina wearing Viv markings. Have you checked the start of the serial
> number to see who actually made it? That could be useful to those
> looking for one.
>
Mine starts with 37xxetc., indicating it was made for Vivitar by Tokina.
Remember the younger fellow who posted here for awhile that had an OM1 and
kept singing the praises of his Tokina 90mm? I suspect it is the same or
very similar design.
Wayne
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|