Richard Schätzl wrote:
>
> Dear Doris, Gene,
>
> what´s your judgement to the 2,8 24mm Zuiko?
>
> Early (non MC) 2,8 24mm: a dog?
I have an early 24/2.8 SC and a 24/2 MC.Both are good lenses.The newer
lens is heavier and in my opinion contrastier.A contrastier photo often
looks sharper to the eye even if the numbers say otherwise.Something I
learned about the 2.8 is that when you close it down all the way it is
not as sharp as in the middle f/stop range.I think this happens with a
lot of wide angles where you can see it in small prints.I have not shot
the f/2 that much to see if the same is true for it.
>
> Later (MC) 2,8 24mm: decent lens?
I don't know anything about this lens.
>
> Does multicoating make such a difference?
Yes,it does in situations such as including the sun or an other light
source which causes flare.Depending on the lens it will probably be less
in the MC version.
>
> How good is the 2,8 in comparison to the 2,0 version? I could test the
> 2,0 24mm Zuiko and found it a decent lens, it vignettes a little bit
> with open aperture.
I choose the f/2 over the 2.8 usually because I prefer the easier
focusing and the speed of the lens lets me shoot available light with
one more stop.Anyone want to buy my f/2.8? -Gene
> Richard
############################################################
| This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List
| To receive the Digest version mailto:listserv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| with "subscribe olympus-digest" in the message body.
| To unsubscribe from the current list mailto:listserv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| with "unsubscribe olympus" in the body.
| For questions mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html
############################################################
|