On 17 Sep 98, at 2:16, Joseph Albert wrote:
>
> one point not mentioned in comparing the 35/2 and 35/2.8 is that
> the 35/2.8 is more flare resistant. It is one of the most flare resistant
> lenses I've used actually. even the single-coated 35/2.8's can be
> pointed at the sun and create images without ghosting of the aperture
> blades. I don't know if this would work at high noon, but any sort of
> composition where one would have the sun in the frame should be fine,
> at least from my own experience. I have some shots of sunsets over
> a large lake and the sun itslef and rays of the sun are all imaged
> quite well.
>
Generally, this may be true, but my SC 35/2.8 definitely will
produce flare, sometimes a lot, with the sun in the frame, or near
the edge. Definitely more prone to flare than my MC 50/1.8 in the
same situation. Mostly I can avoid this by careful shading, but I am
looking for a better hood than the current noname rubber one I use,
which is probably not narrow enough. I noticed the OM hood for the
35/2.8 also fits the 50/1.8 and 1.4, but I don't have one. I even tried
the rubber hood from my 85/2 (also for 100/2.8) and it appears to
work without vignetting wide open, at least through the finder. I'm
sure tests shots will reveal soem vignetting though...
Shawn & Janis Wright
swright@xxxxxxxxx
http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/~swright
(Olympus List Archives)
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|