On Fri, 22 Jan 1999 15:35:24 -0800, "Shawn Wright" <swright@xxxxxxxxx> jammed
all night, and by sunrise was overheard remarking:
> On 22 Jan 99 at 13:25, William Sommerwerck wrote:
> > Of course, Olympus makes nothing wider than 18mm, and there's a big
> > difference between 14mm and 18mm, so if you want something that wide,
> > there aren't many choices.
> What about the Zuiko 16mm/3.5?
I 'spect he's talking about rectilinear lenses; the 16mm and the 8mm are
fisheyes. You can find rectilinears down to 13mm or less for some of the
wonderbricks, but the prices seems to double or thereabouts with each
loss of a millimeter.
I bought a Soligor 17mm f3.5 back in the 70s, right before a month+ trip
to the wild west (Colorado, Arizona, Utah, Montana, etc). Very useful
for some kinds of scenery -- we saw a killer double-rainbow in Colorado,
my Dad's minimal of 28mm could only get a piece of it. I would have gone
for the OM 18mm if I wasn't paying for equipment at the time by washing
windows and maybe 3-5 newsphotos a month...
--
Dave Haynie | V.P. Technology, Met@box Infonet, AG | http://www.metabox.de
Be Dev #2024 | NB851 Powered! | Amiga 2000, 3000, 4000, PIOS One
< 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 >
|