m-a-x wrote: cogitech wrote:
Somehow I missed these shots before. Very nice, especially the first one!
Thank you, I like \'em too! I love wide angle landscape shots.
aoluain wrote:
Personally I would be opting for the Tamron at a quarter of the money but not quarter of the quality, far from it.
value V\'s quality and to me the Tamron has both, the Zuiko has only the quality not the value.
I fully agree. The price difference is just too high.
And there are more things than quality alone:
1) I like the form factor of the Tamron more, with respect to front lens design. It\'s easy to hold filters in front of, it and also a filter holder for Cokin-P and similar systems is easily self-made.
2) Since we\'re speaking about UWA lenses: the Tammy is wider
Its a real shame the tammy does\'nt have a front filter thread like the Tokina version.
Without a filter thread I cant use my 67mm hood and/or polariser like I can with my Tokina 17/f3.5.
I\'ve just aquired a near mint one for £149.99 from a camera shop whilst visiting Brighton on the S. Coast.
The lens was being sold on behalf of a customer, on a commission basis, for £189.99 but I managed to knock him down from the asking price.
If I\'d known it did\'nt have a filter thread I might not have bought it but I did\'nt notice it in the shop.
I was very supprised to find it had filters already built in but dissapointed that the filters on offer are not what I would have chosen.
For instance I would have like to have had a 80b blue filter built in to cancel out the awful yellow/orange light from sodium street lighting in night shots but instead they included a Y2 yellow filter that would make it far worse!
Wide open its definitely sharper than my Tokina 17/f3.5 so at least the concelation of knowing I have a better WA lens.
I also bought a \"mystery\" M42 preset lens from the same shop...It had a screw on front lenscap that was totally jammed on so it was\'nt possible to see what lens it was...It looked like a slow 80-90mm and it was made in Japan, thats all I knew.
Today I finally managed to prise the cap off and it turned out to be a Vivitar Tele 135mm f2.8. Its certainly the smallest 135mm lens I\'ve ever seen, seems pretty sharp even when WO and the best bit was it only cost me £2!
m-a-x wrote: cogitech wrote:
Somehow I missed these shots before. Very nice, especially the first one!
Thank you, I like \'em too! I love wide angle landscape shots.
aoluain wrote:
Personally I would be opting for the Tamron at a quarter of the money but not quarter of the quality, far from it.
value V\'s quality and to me the Tamron has both, the Zuiko has only the quality not the value.
I fully agree. The price difference is just too high.
And there are more things than quality alone:
1) I like the form factor of the Tamron more, with respect to front lens design. It\'s easy to hold filters in front of, it and also a filter holder for Cokin-P and similar systems is easily self-made.
2) Since we\'re speaking about UWA lenses: the Tammy is wider
Its a real shame the tammy does\'nt have a front filter thread like the Tokina version.
Without a filter thread I cant use my 67mm hood and/or polariser like I can with my Tokina 17/f3.5.
I\'ve just aquired a near mint one for £149.99 from a camera shop whilst visiting Brighton on the S. Coast.
The lens was being sold on behalf of a customer, on a commission basis, for £189.99 but I managed to knock him down from the asking price.
If I\'d known it did\'nt have a filter thread I might not have bought it but I did\'nt notice it in the shop.
I was very supprised to find it had filters already built in but dissapointed that the filters on offer are not what I would have chosen.
For instance I would have like to have had a 80b blue filter built in to cancel out the awful yellow/orange light from sodium street lighting in night shots but instead they included a Y2 yellow filter that would make it far worse!
Wide open its definitely sharper than my Tokina 17/f3.5 so at least the concelation of knowing I have a better WA lens.
m-a-x wrote: cogitech wrote:
Somehow I missed these shots before. Very nice, especially the first one!
Thank you, I like \'em too! I love wide angle landscape shots.
aoluain wrote:
Personally I would be opting for the Tamron at a quarter of the money but not quarter of the quality, far from it.
value V\'s quality and to me the Tamron has both, the Zuiko has only the quality not the value.
I fully agree. The price difference is just too high.
And there are more things than quality alone:
1) I like the form factor of the Tamron more, with respect to front lens design. It\'s easy to hold filters in front of, it and also a filter holder for Cokin-P and similar systems is easily self-made.
2) Since we\'re speaking about UWA lenses: the Tammy is wider
Its a real shame the tammy does\'nt have a front filter thread like the Tokina version.
Without a filter thread I cant use my 67mm hood and/or polariser like I can with my Tokina 17/f3.5.
I\'ve just aquired a near mint one for £149.99 from a camera shop whilst visiting Brighton on the S. Coast.
The lens was being sold on behalf of a customer, on a commission basis, for £189.99 but I managed to knock him down from the asking price.
If I\'d known it did\'nt have a filter thread I might not have bought it but I did\'nt notice it in the shop.
I was very supprised to find it had filters already built in but dissapointed that the filters on offer are not what I would have chosen.
For instance I would have like to have had a 80b blue filter built in to cancel out the awful yellow/orange light from sodium street lighting in night shots but instead they included a Y2 yellow filter that would make it far worse!
Wide open its definitely sharper than my Tokina 17/f3.5 so at least the concelation of knowing I have a better WA lens.
m-a-x wrote: cogitech wrote:
Somehow I missed these shots before. Very nice, especially the first one!
Thank you, I like \'em too! I love wide angle landscape shots.
aoluain wrote:
Personally I would be opting for the Tamron at a quarter of the money but not quarter of the quality, far from it.
value V\'s quality and to me the Tamron has both, the Zuiko has only the quality not the value.
I fully agree. The price difference is just too high.
And there are more things than quality alone:
1) I like the form factor of the Tamron more, with respect to front lens design. It\'s easy to hold filters in front of, it and also a filter holder for Cokin-P and similar systems is easily self-made.
2) Since we\'re speaking about UWA lenses: the Tammy is wider
Shame the tammy does\'nt have a front filter thread like the Tokina version.
Nov 22, 2009 at 10:12 AM
Previous versions of Alf Beharie's message #7804955 « The Tamron SP 17/3.5 Thread »
