Andrew Fildes wrote:
> .... Rather wish I'd cut it back to 200 iso though.
> The Oly tech rep was encouraging the attendees to use f8 so it's likely that
> you're right.
> I suspect that this is a lens to use at f8+ and 1/250+ in bright conditions
> when racked out to 300mm.
> I am very tempted tho'.
>
Yeah, I was idly wondering about that very combo and whether the 42-70
(84-140 efl) gap would be a problem.
Then I realized I could avoid buying into a whole new system with a
450D. At least in dpreview's sample images, the 450D rather whups the
420 in detail delivered. My 28-300 IS lens @ 300mm is 480mm efl.
Considering any softishness @ 300mm on the DZ 70-300, I suspect results
from the 450D cropped to 600 mm efl will be much like those of the E-520
and 70-300. Maybe even better above 200 ISO as the 450D sensor system
really is quieter at 400 and above.
A 450D body is just over $700 delivered, add $70 for the 18-55 IS, if
desired. The switch to SD cards might have been an issue if I hadn't
just picked up three 4GB Extreme IIIs for a net of about $17 each.
An E-520 with 14-42 and 70-300 is over $1,000. And of course, I can't
use my other EF bits, like the 90/2.8 macro.
So yet again, I've taken a run at E-thingies and probably talked myself
out of it. Once one has bought into a system, it's expensive to parallel
or switch.
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|