Question about longish Oly lenses

[Nathan Wajsman-2]

I am thinking about getting a longer lens for my E3, taking advantage  
of the fact that my uncle from Florida is coming over in August and  
can "smuggle" a lens bought with US rubles at B&H.

I have looked at the following 3 lenses:

- the 50-200mm has the best specs but also the highest price and I am  
not thrilled by the 1 kg weight
- the 40-150mm is light but its range overlaps with the 12-60mm I  
already have; but it is the cheapest of these 3
- the 70-300mm appears the most useful, as its range dovetails nicely  
with the 12-60. It is also light for this focal length, and inexpensive.

What is the opinion of this esteemed group of the relative merits of  
these last two lenses?

Cheers,
Nathan

Nathan Wajsman
Alicante, Spain
http://www.frozenlight.eu
http://www.greatpix.eu
http://www.nathanfoto.com

Books: http://www.blurb.com/bookstore/search?search=wajsman&x=0&y=0
PICTURE OF THE WEEK: http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws
Blog: http://www.fotocycle.dk/blog





==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@...
==============================================

[Jim Nichols-2]

Nathan,

I can't locate the review articles that I read about a month ago, but most
of them were very complimentary of the Zuiko 70-300.  The examples of images
that I saw were impressive.  The lens was thought to be a great buy for the
money.

Jim Nichols
Tullahoma, TN USA
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nathan Wajsman" <photo@...>
To: <olympus@...>
Sent: Saturday, July 19, 2008 10:11 AM
Subject: [OM] Question about longish Oly lenses

>
> I am thinking about getting a longer lens for my E3, taking advantage
> of the fact that my uncle from Florida is coming over in August and
> can "smuggle" a lens bought with US rubles at B&H.
>
> I have looked at the following 3 lenses:
>
> - the 50-200mm has the best specs but also the highest price and I am
> not thrilled by the 1 kg weight
> - the 40-150mm is light but its range overlaps with the 12-60mm I
> already have; but it is the cheapest of these 3
> - the 70-300mm appears the most useful, as its range dovetails nicely
> with the 12-60. It is also light for this focal length, and inexpensive.
>
> What is the opinion of this esteemed group of the relative merits of
> these last two lenses?
>
> Cheers,
> Nathan
>
> Nathan Wajsman
> Alicante, Spain
> http://www.frozenlight.eu
> http://www.greatpix.eu
> http://www.nathanfoto.com
>
> Books: http://www.blurb.com/bookstore/search?search=wajsman&x=0&y=0
> PICTURE OF THE WEEK: http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws
> Blog: http://www.fotocycle.dk/blog
>
>
>
>
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies:        olympusadmin@...
> ==============================================
>

==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@...
==============================================

[Scott Peden]

I was talked into early this year, it is now my 2nd most used lens (after
the 14-54) and I agree with those that talked me into it, it acts better
then a standard lens.

I have the EC 14 on it almost constantly and even that way have used it for
macros at about 3 feet, that give mea FOV of about 2.5 inches and it is
better then the 14-45 or the 40-150 for that also.

Now I want more zoom (same thing I was saying before) I really need about
500-700 for the zoom shots of hawks, but at 420 this has done more to make
me happy then any other Zoom lens I have bought over the last 4 years.

Oh yeah, and it appears to be faster then the 40-150 too, operating better
hand held then any lens I have had that is 200 mm or longer.

Scott
-----Original Message-----
From: olympus-owner@... [mailto:olympus-owner@...] On Behalf
Of Jim Nichols
Sent: Saturday, July 19, 2008 8:27 AM
To: olympus@...
Subject: [OM] Re: Question about longish Oly lenses


Nathan,

I can't locate the review articles that I read about a month ago, but most
of them were very complimentary of the Zuiko 70-300.  The examples of images

that I saw were impressive.  The lens was thought to be a great buy for the
money.

Jim Nichols
Tullahoma, TN USA
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nathan Wajsman" <photo@...>
To: <olympus@...>
Sent: Saturday, July 19, 2008 10:11 AM
Subject: [OM] Question about longish Oly lenses

>
> I am thinking about getting a longer lens for my E3, taking advantage
> of the fact that my uncle from Florida is coming over in August and
> can "smuggle" a lens bought with US rubles at B&H.
>
> I have looked at the following 3 lenses:
>
> - the 50-200mm has the best specs but also the highest price and I am
> not thrilled by the 1 kg weight
> - the 40-150mm is light but its range overlaps with the 12-60mm I
> already have; but it is the cheapest of these 3
> - the 70-300mm appears the most useful, as its range dovetails nicely
> with the 12-60. It is also light for this focal length, and inexpensive.
>
> What is the opinion of this esteemed group of the relative merits of
> these last two lenses?
>
> Cheers,
> Nathan
>
> Nathan Wajsman
> Alicante, Spain
> http://www.frozenlight.eu
> http://www.greatpix.eu
> http://www.nathanfoto.com
>
> Books: http://www.blurb.com/bookstore/search?search=wajsman&x=0&y=0
> PICTURE OF THE WEEK: http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws
> Blog: http://www.fotocycle.dk/blog
>
>
>
>
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies:        olympusadmin@...
> ==============================================
>

==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@...
==============================================


==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@...
==============================================

[Piers Hemy]

I had not realised the 50-200 was so heavy, Nathan.  It doesn't feel so bad
on the camera, leastwise!  But it's a significant increase on the 70-300 for
sure.

Judging only from the paper specs, I would point out that it is relatively
slow (which I regard as even more important with long lenses, though IS will
help a great deal), and as far as I understand you cannot use manual focus
with the 70-300.  But (still judging from paper specs!) the price
differential between 50-200 and 70-300 is very significant!  It looks a
bargain.

If you care to look at a fellow countryman's review (with other opinions
added) try here:
http://www.wrotniak.net/photo/43/zd-070-300.html  the short version - he
likes it very much.


--
Piers
             

-----Original Message-----
From: olympus-owner@... [mailto:olympus-owner@...] On Behalf
Of Nathan Wajsman
Sent: 19 July 2008 16:12
To: olympus@...
Subject: [OM] Question about longish Oly lenses


I am thinking about getting a longer lens for my E3, taking advantage of the
fact that my uncle from Florida is coming over in August and can "smuggle" a
lens bought with US rubles at B&H.

I have looked at the following 3 lenses:

- the 50-200mm has the best specs but also the highest price and I am not
thrilled by the 1 kg weight
- the 40-150mm is light but its range overlaps with the 12-60mm I already
have; but it is the cheapest of these 3
- the 70-300mm appears the most useful, as its range dovetails nicely with
the 12-60. It is also light for this focal length, and inexpensive.

What is the opinion of this esteemed group of the relative merits of these
last two lenses?

Cheers,
Nathan

Nathan Wajsman
Alicante, Spain
http://www.frozenlight.eu
http://www.greatpix.eu
http://www.nathanfoto.com

Books: http://www.blurb.com/bookstore/search?search=wajsman&x=0&y=0
PICTURE OF THE WEEK: http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws
Blog: http://www.fotocycle.dk/blog





==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@...
==============================================


==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@...
==============================================

[Ton Maas]

Very happy with the 50-200, which I bought almost immediately after
purchasing the E1 in 2004. My wife recently got the 75-300 and is very
happy with its optical quality. Her only complaint is its relatively
small aperture, which easily becomes a problem with her E400 (which
already produces quite a bit of noise at ISO400). My guess is this would
be a smaller problem with the E3 because of IS.

Ton in Amsterdam

> I had not realised the 50-200 was so heavy, Nathan.  It doesn't feel so
> bad
> on the camera, leastwise!  But it's a significant increase on the 70-300
> for
> sure.
>
> Judging only from the paper specs, I would point out that it is
> relatively
> slow (which I regard as even more important with long lenses, though IS
> will
> help a great deal), and as far as I understand you cannot use manual
> focus
> with the 70-300.  But (still judging from paper specs!) the price
> differential between 50-200 and 70-300 is very significant!  It looks a
> bargain.
>
> If you care to look at a fellow countryman's review (with other opinions
> added) try here:
> http://www.wrotniak.net/photo/43/zd-070-300.html  the short version - he
> likes it very much.
>
>
> --
> Piers
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: olympus-owner@... [mailto:olympus-owner@...] On
> Behalf
> Of Nathan Wajsman
> Sent: 19 July 2008 16:12
> To: olympus@...
> Subject: [OM] Question about longish Oly lenses
>
>
> I am thinking about getting a longer lens for my E3, taking advantage of
> the
> fact that my uncle from Florida is coming over in August and can
> "smuggle" a
> lens bought with US rubles at B&H.
>
> I have looked at the following 3 lenses:
>
> - the 50-200mm has the best specs but also the highest price and I am not
> thrilled by the 1 kg weight
> - the 40-150mm is light but its range overlaps with the 12-60mm I already
> have; but it is the cheapest of these 3
> - the 70-300mm appears the most useful, as its range dovetails nicely
> with
> the 12-60. It is also light for this focal length, and inexpensive.
>
> What is the opinion of this esteemed group of the relative merits of
> these
> last two lenses?
>
> Cheers,
> Nathan
>
> Nathan Wajsman
> Alicante, Spain
> http://www.frozenlight.eu
> http://www.greatpix.eu
> http://www.nathanfoto.com
>
> Books: http://www.blurb.com/bookstore/search?search=wajsman&x=0&y=0
> PICTURE OF THE WEEK: http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws
> Blog: http://www.fotocycle.dk/blog
>
>
>
>
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies:        olympusadmin@...
> ==============================================
>
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies:        olympusadmin@...
> ==============================================
>

==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@...
==============================================

[Timpe, Jim]

Can't use manual focus with the 70-300?  Don't know where you heard that.  Lens even has a manual/auto switch on it (only Oly lens I've got with that feature).
Isn't always the easiest to get to critical focus (that small aperature), but it does indeed manually focus.

________________________________

From: olympus-owner@... on behalf of Piers Hemy
Sent: Sat 7/19/2008 8:48 AM
To: olympus@...
Subject: [OM] Re: Question about longish Oly lenses




I had not realised the 50-200 was so heavy, Nathan.  It doesn't feel so bad
on the camera, leastwise!  But it's a significant increase on the 70-300 for
sure.

Judging only from the paper specs, I would point out that it is relatively
slow (which I regard as even more important with long lenses, though IS will
help a great deal), and as far as I understand you cannot use manual focus
with the 70-300.  But (still judging from paper specs!) the price
differential between 50-200 and 70-300 is very significant!  It looks a
bargain.

If you care to look at a fellow countryman's review (with other opinions
added) try here:
http://www.wrotniak.net/photo/43/zd-070-300.html  the short version - he
likes it very much.


--
Piers
           

-----Original Message-----
From: olympus-owner@... [mailto:olympus-owner@...] On Behalf
Of Nathan Wajsman
Sent: 19 July 2008 16:12
To: olympus@...
Subject: [OM] Question about longish Oly lenses


I am thinking about getting a longer lens for my E3, taking advantage of the
fact that my uncle from Florida is coming over in August and can "smuggle" a
lens bought with US rubles at B&H.

I have looked at the following 3 lenses:

- the 50-200mm has the best specs but also the highest price and I am not
thrilled by the 1 kg weight
- the 40-150mm is light but its range overlaps with the 12-60mm I already
have; but it is the cheapest of these 3
- the 70-300mm appears the most useful, as its range dovetails nicely with
the 12-60. It is also light for this focal length, and inexpensive.

What is the opinion of this esteemed group of the relative merits of these
last two lenses?

Cheers,
Nathan

Nathan Wajsman
Alicante, Spain
http://www.frozenlight.eu <http://www.frozenlight.eu/>
http://www.greatpix.eu <http://www.greatpix.eu/>
http://www.nathanfoto.com <http://www.nathanfoto.com/>

Books: http://www.blurb.com/bookstore/search?search=wajsman&x=0&y=0
PICTURE OF THE WEEK: http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws
Blog: http://www.fotocycle.dk/blog





==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com <http://www.zuikoholic.com/>
List nannies:        olympusadmin@...
==============================================


==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com <http://www.zuikoholic.com/>
List nannies:        olympusadmin@...
==============================================





This message (including any attachments) contains confidential
and/or proprietary information intended only for the addressee.  
Any unauthorized disclosure, copying, distribution or reliance on
the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may
constitute a violation of law.  If you are not the intended
recipient, please notify the sender immediately by responding to
this e-mail, and delete the message from your system.  If you
have any questions about this e-mail please notify the sender
immediately.
-- No attachments (even text) are allowed --
-- Type: application/ms-tnef
-- File: winmail.dat


==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@...
==============================================

[Wiliam Wagenaar-2]

I am very fond of my 50-200mm. Focuses very fast in normal light and is
tack sharp and quite bright. Only gripe I have with it is the bokeh
which does not look to great sometimes. As for the weight? No problem
when attached to the E-1, especially if the HLD-2 is also attached. I
can immagine though that it is a bit heavy on the 420.

Good luck choosing.

Wiliam


> What is the opinion of this esteemed group of the relative merits of  
> these last two lenses?
>
> Cheers,
> Nathan
>



==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@...
==============================================

[Nathan Wajsman-2]

Thanks to Jim, Scott, Piers, Ton, Wiliam and Jim T. for helpful  
replies. The consensus seems to be that the 70-300 is a worthy  
performer, so if I go for a zoom, that will be the one.

Cheers,
Nathan

Nathan Wajsman
Alicante, Spain
http://www.frozenlight.eu
http://www.greatpix.eu
http://www.nathanfoto.com

Books: http://www.blurb.com/bookstore/search?search=wajsman&x=0&y=0
PICTURE OF THE WEEK: http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws
Blog: http://www.fotocycle.dk/blog



On Jul 19, 2008, at 5:11 PM, Nathan Wajsman wrote:

>
> I am thinking about getting a longer lens for my E3, taking advantage
> of the fact that my uncle from Florida is coming over in August and
> can "smuggle" a lens bought with US rubles at B&H.
>
> I have looked at the following 3 lenses:
>
> - the 50-200mm has the best specs but also the highest price and I am
> not thrilled by the 1 kg weight
> - the 40-150mm is light but its range overlaps with the 12-60mm I
> already have; but it is the cheapest of these 3
> - the 70-300mm appears the most useful, as its range dovetails nicely
> with the 12-60. It is also light for this focal length, and  
> inexpensive.
>
> What is the opinion of this esteemed group of the relative merits of
> these last two lenses?
>
> Cheers,
> Nathan
>
> Nathan Wajsman
> Alicante, Spain
> http://www.frozenlight.eu
> http://www.greatpix.eu
> http://www.nathanfoto.com
>
> Books: http://www.blurb.com/bookstore/search?search=wajsman&x=0&y=0
> PICTURE OF THE WEEK: http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws
> Blog: http://www.fotocycle.dk/blog
>
>
>
>
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies:        olympusadmin@...
> ==============================================

==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@...
==============================================

[C.H.Ling-2]

The DZ70-300 looks like borrowed the glasses from Sigma:

http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses_all_details.asp?id=3303&navigator=3

Based on photozone's review, its performance is not that impressive:

http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/Canon%20EOS%20Lens%20Tests/326-sigma-af-70-300mm-f4-56-apo-dg-macro-test-report--review?start=1

Just like the DZ18-180, it has the same optical design from Sigma 18-200, I
was hopping the Olympus version better but I was wrong, the edge performance
drop at 35mm and overall drop at 180mm disappointed me.

C.H.Ling

----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott Peden" <scotpeden@...>

>
> I was talked into early this year, it is now my 2nd most used lens (after
> the 14-54) and I agree with those that talked me into it, it acts better
> then a standard lens.
>
> I have the EC 14 on it almost constantly and even that way have used it
> for
> macros at about 3 feet, that give mea FOV of about 2.5 inches and it is
> better then the 14-45 or the 40-150 for that also.
>
> Now I want more zoom (same thing I was saying before) I really need about
> 500-700 for the zoom shots of hawks, but at 420 this has done more to make
> me happy then any other Zoom lens I have bought over the last 4 years.
>
> Oh yeah, and it appears to be faster then the 40-150 too, operating better
> hand held then any lens I have had that is 200 mm or longer.
>
> Scott
> -----Original Message-----
> From: olympus-owner@... [mailto:olympus-owner@...] On Behalf
> Of Jim Nichols
> Sent: Saturday, July 19, 2008 8:27 AM
> To: olympus@...
> Subject: [OM] Re: Question about longish Oly lenses
>
>
> Nathan,
>
> I can't locate the review articles that I read about a month ago, but most
> of them were very complimentary of the Zuiko 70-300.  The examples of
> images
>
> that I saw were impressive.  The lens was thought to be a great buy for
> the
> money.
>
> Jim Nichols
> Tullahoma, TN USA

==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@...
==============================================

[Ton Maas]

Yes, it was obviously borrowed from Sigma, but the Oly website suggests
it has been modified (more ED elements) to meet Oly standards. Anyone has
more info on that?

Ton

> The DZ70-300 looks like borrowed the glasses from Sigma:
>
> http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses_all_details.asp?id=3303&navigator=3
>
> Based on photozone's review, its performance is not that impressive:
>
> http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/Canon%20EOS%20Lens%20Tests/326-sigma-af-70-300mm-f4-56-apo-dg-macro-test-report--review?start=1
>
> Just like the DZ18-180, it has the same optical design from Sigma 18-200,
> I
> was hopping the Olympus version better but I was wrong, the edge
> performance
> drop at 35mm and overall drop at 180mm disappointed me.
>
> C.H.Ling
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Scott Peden" <scotpeden@...>
>
>>
>> I was talked into early this year, it is now my 2nd most used lens
>> (after
>> the 14-54) and I agree with those that talked me into it, it acts
>> better
>> then a standard lens.
>>
>> I have the EC 14 on it almost constantly and even that way have used it
>> for
>> macros at about 3 feet, that give mea FOV of about 2.5 inches and it is
>> better then the 14-45 or the 40-150 for that also.
>>
>> Now I want more zoom (same thing I was saying before) I really need
>> about
>> 500-700 for the zoom shots of hawks, but at 420 this has done more to
>> make
>> me happy then any other Zoom lens I have bought over the last 4 years.
>>
>> Oh yeah, and it appears to be faster then the 40-150 too, operating
>> better
>> hand held then any lens I have had that is 200 mm or longer.
>>
>> Scott
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: olympus-owner@... [mailto:olympus-owner@...] On
>> Behalf
>> Of Jim Nichols
>> Sent: Saturday, July 19, 2008 8:27 AM
>> To: olympus@...
>> Subject: [OM] Re: Question about longish Oly lenses
>>
>>
>> Nathan,
>>
>> I can't locate the review articles that I read about a month ago, but
>> most
>> of them were very complimentary of the Zuiko 70-300.  The examples of
>> images
>>
>> that I saw were impressive.  The lens was thought to be a great buy for
>> the
>> money.
>>
>> Jim Nichols
>> Tullahoma, TN USA
>
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies:        olympusadmin@...
> ==============================================
>

==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@...
==============================================

[C.H.Ling-2]

Both have same lens construction, three ED elements.

http://asia.olympus-global.com/imsg/dslr/lenses/70-300_40-56/

C.H.Ling

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ton Maas" <tonmaas@...>

>
> Yes, it was obviously borrowed from Sigma, but the Oly website suggests
> it has been modified (more ED elements) to meet Oly standards. Anyone has
> more info on that?
>
> Ton
>
>
>> The DZ70-300 looks like borrowed the glasses from Sigma:
>>
>> http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses_all_details.asp?id=3303&navigator=3
>>
>> Based on photozone's review, its performance is not that impressive:
>>
>> http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/Canon%20EOS%20Lens%20Tests/326-sigma-af-70-300mm-f4-56-apo-dg-macro-test-report--review?start=1
>>
>> Just like the DZ18-180, it has the same optical design from Sigma 18-200,
>> I
>> was hopping the Olympus version better but I was wrong, the edge
>> performance
>> drop at 35mm and overall drop at 180mm disappointed me.
>>
>> C.H.Ling

==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@...
==============================================

[Larry-35]

C.H.Ling wrote:
> The DZ70-300 looks like borrowed the glasses from Sigma:
>
> Based on photozone's review, its performance is not that impressive
>  
Yes, the Tamron version is a better, sharper lens with 6 year warranty.
I use mine a lot. The only advantage to the Sigma is a bit less PF, and
the Sigma adds a small amount of green CA.

The Tamron is also about $149 new, and doesn't say "Olympus" on it.


==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@...
==============================================

[Scott Peden]

It is listed as a standard lens, not a high quality lens as the 50-200, so I
suppose I should be unhappy with it instead of being pleased that it has out
preformed any other lens I have ever used over the 200 mm range.

-----Original Message-----
From: olympus-owner@... [mailto:olympus-owner@...] On Behalf
Of C.H.Ling
Sent: Sunday, July 20, 2008 1:38 AM
To: olympus@...
Subject: [OM] Re: Question about longish Oly lenses


The DZ70-300 looks like borrowed the glasses from Sigma:

http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses_all_details.asp?id=3303&navigator=3

Based on photozone's review, its performance is not that impressive:

http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/Canon%20EOS%20Lens%20Tests/326-sigma-af-70-3
00mm-f4-56-apo-dg-macro-test-report--review?start=1

Just like the DZ18-180, it has the same optical design from Sigma 18-200, I
was hopping the Olympus version better but I was wrong, the edge performance
drop at 35mm and overall drop at 180mm disappointed me.

C.H.Ling

----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott Peden" <scotpeden@...>

>
> I was talked into early this year, it is now my 2nd most used lens (after
> the 14-54) and I agree with those that talked me into it, it acts better
> then a standard lens.
>
> I have the EC 14 on it almost constantly and even that way have used it
> for
> macros at about 3 feet, that give mea FOV of about 2.5 inches and it is
> better then the 14-45 or the 40-150 for that also.
>
> Now I want more zoom (same thing I was saying before) I really need about
> 500-700 for the zoom shots of hawks, but at 420 this has done more to make
> me happy then any other Zoom lens I have bought over the last 4 years.
>
> Oh yeah, and it appears to be faster then the 40-150 too, operating better
> hand held then any lens I have had that is 200 mm or longer.
>
> Scott
> -----Original Message-----
> From: olympus-owner@... [mailto:olympus-owner@...] On Behalf
> Of Jim Nichols
> Sent: Saturday, July 19, 2008 8:27 AM
> To: olympus@...
> Subject: [OM] Re: Question about longish Oly lenses
>
>
> Nathan,
>
> I can't locate the review articles that I read about a month ago, but most
> of them were very complimentary of the Zuiko 70-300.  The examples of
> images
>
> that I saw were impressive.  The lens was thought to be a great buy for
> the
> money.
>
> Jim Nichols
> Tullahoma, TN USA

==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@...
==============================================


==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@...
==============================================

[C.H.Ling-2]

Yes, based on the test result Tamron 70-300 is better in resolution but it
also suffer from purple fringe. You are right about the price, it is much
cheaper than the Olympus version but the Tamron is very weak in
construction, my friend damaged mine by holding the front focusing ring
during mounting on the camera, fortunately I got a free repair.

C.H.Ling

----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry" <halpert@...>

>
> C.H.Ling wrote:
>> The DZ70-300 looks like borrowed the glasses from Sigma:
>>
>> Based on photozone's review, its performance is not that impressive
>>
> Yes, the Tamron version is a better, sharper lens with 6 year warranty.
> I use mine a lot. The only advantage to the Sigma is a bit less PF, and
> the Sigma adds a small amount of green CA.
>
> The Tamron is also about $149 new, and doesn't say "Olympus" on it.

==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@...
==============================================