I have not read the article yet - but I do have the 28-200/3.8-5.6 Tamron, the version before the current one. I bought it cheaply from eBay and mainly out of curiosity. I have tried to test the performance at the long end and found that used as it is meant - snapshot and travel lens - it performs quite well - with ISO 400 film in good daylight. I like it. But for other purposes I have other lenses. All the best! Raimo K Personal photography homepage at: http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho
----- Original Message ----- From: "graywolf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, August 03, 2004 4:21 AM Subject: Re: Mike Johnston's latest... > My opinion is that if a 28-200 is the only lens you have you will use it. If you > have about anything else in your kit you will not. > > How often do you use a 200? Oh, then why would you want to carry the thing > around all the time? Yes, Mike was being sarcastic. For one thing (as he has > told me) the editor is always after him to write columns about lenses. He > doesn't like writing them. But at the same time there is at least an element of > truth in everything he said. > > Seems like we have not had a "what lens do you carry" thread in quite awhile. So... > > My 35mm kit consists of a 24mm, 50mm, 100mm, and a 80-200/2.8 zoom. I also carry > a cheap 2x teleconverter for those rare times I need something longer that > 200mm. If I had the money I would also have a fast 35mm, an 18 or 20mm, and > probably a fast 300 to replace the 2x. > > If I could only have 2 lenses, from 50 years experience, I would take a > 35mm/f2.0 (general photography) and a 100mm/f2.8 (portraits, formal and informal). > > My 4x5 kit consists of a 135mm (the equivalent of a 35mm in 135 format). > > > -- > > Don Sanderson wrote: > > Thanks Rob, > > Have you ever tried any of the "all purpose" lenses in this range? > > Like I said to Tom C., I don't need any more lenses that won't get used > > much. > > > > Don > > > >
