On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 8:50 AM, Ken Norton <ken@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > I really like 1 and 2. That Tokina was an ace. I have no idea why you
> got
> > rid of it. And that 200 shot proves you had one before you got mine (not
> > that I didn't believe you).
>
> Thank you, Joel. I had a major love/hate relationship with the Tokina.
> One serious case of disfunctional relationship. One the one hand, I
> loved that lens for the sharpness, flat-fieldedness, flare-resistance,
> linearity and overall technical wizardy. I hated that lens for the
> rotating front element, the unnatural sunstars, unmatched
> colorcast/contrast to the Zuikos, diameter and weight. If I had an
> all-Tokina ATX lens collection, it would have remained a real corker.
> But that lens just didn't mix and match well with the Zuikos. It was
> an amazing lens for event/wedding photography, but I was constantly
> grabbing the 24/2.8 and 100/2.8 for anything artistic. It was,
> however, a perfect lens for the first generation of Portra films.
>
> I had the first 200/4 from around 1989 to 1993. This was likely my
> first trip with that lens. In 1993 it split an element.
>
> Your 200/4 has been a wonderful addition and is a permanent fixture in
> the backpack kit.
>
I understand about the personality clash of the Tokina. I have the same
problem with the Tamron 24-135 I got to go with the 5D. Ironically, some
of the same feelings affect the use of my new Leica D 14-150 (which zooms
the "wrong" way), but I'm going to get over that.
I'm glad you've got the 200/4. It's your one remaining silver nose, other
than the mothballed 100/2.8?
Joel W.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|