But, with all the computers in the design and manufacturering process, I can see how an extra few millimeters could be real enough, and the packaging does suggest a sliaghtly naive target market. 80-200mm zoom seemed to be the commonplace back then, with 70-210mm from some sources. And it's still within the 3:1 zoom.
Interestingly, according to various review sites, the accepted tolerance in quoted focal lengths is around +/- 5% - the Tamron 200-500mm I'm eyeing is actually (according to http://www.photo.net/equipment/tamron/) closer to 485mm at the long end, and their new 28-300mm super zoom is nearer 280mm.
I'll check its quoted focal lengths when I test it later today - the EXIF data on the Canon includes the focal length it was taken at.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2006-01-26 08:31 am (UTC)Interestingly, according to various review sites, the accepted tolerance in quoted focal lengths is around +/- 5% - the Tamron 200-500mm I'm eyeing is actually (according to http://www.photo.net/equipment/tamron/) closer to 485mm at the long end, and their new 28-300mm super zoom is nearer 280mm.
I'll check its quoted focal lengths when I test it later today - the EXIF data on the Canon includes the focal length it was taken at.