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.
no subject
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.