Glen;
If you can live with a slightly slower lens, the Zuiko 21/3.5 is fantastic.
It's good wide open and typically sells for 1/3 price of 21/2.
George
At 08:54 AM 3/25/99 -0800, you wrote:
>Thanks Garth,
>
>>From the feedback I'm getting I think I'll try to get my hands on both the
>24/2 & 28/2--I've used both these focal lengths for quite awhile and enjoy
>their differences.
>
>As far as the 21/2 goes, I love my EOS 20/2.8 and use a lot--especially for
>people--I like the distorted, slightly wonky sense of space it imparts, and
>would like an olympus (near) equivalent. But I think I'll have to save my
>cash until one comes along.
>
>J'espere que vous avez un bon voyage en France.
>glen
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Garth Wood <garth@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Date: March 25, 1999 7:51 AM
>Subject: Re: [OM] Fast Wide Angles
>
>
>>At 10:05 PM 24/03/99 -0800, Glen Lowry wrote:
>>
>>[snip]
>>
>>>I love wide angles and was looking at picking up a 24/2, 28/2, or 35/2--
>and
>>>possibly a 21. And I was hoping, I might get some advice from those of
>you
>>>using these lenses. Are there any of these fast wides (SC/MC) that I
>should
>>>steer clear of? I've seen Gary Reese's test page--a real treat--but
>noticed
>>>that there was no listing for the 28/2; so what's the skinny on this lens.
>>
>>I've got nothing objective to say about this lens, but I own it (the MC
>version), and subjectively, couldn't be more pleased. My wife and I are
>going to France in the near future, and she's insisted that I *not* bring
>along every lens in the stable, so the 28/2.0 and the 100/2.0 are getting
>the nod, along with one body (either the 2S or the 4).
>>
>>I've found the 28/2.0's performance to be good even wide open, and in
>particular I'm happy with the combination of relatively wide coverage with
>almost zero barrel distortion. I've also found photos taken with this lens
>to have a certain "snap" that I'm hard-pressed to explain rationally, but
>there you have it. In many cases, the 28/2.0 has replaced the 50/1.8 or the
>50/1.4 as my single lens of choice for the OM body.
>>
>>As for the 21/2.0, own that one too, and love it, but there is perceptibly
>more distortion than the 28/2.0, and it definitely displays lateral at the
>edges. But for outdoor vistas, it's awesome. Never used any Zuiko wider
>than the 21, though, so couldn't comment. Oh yeah, nothing like quick snaps
>with the 21 -- it's really tolerant of poorly-adjusted focus. ;-)
>>
>>Garth
>>
>>
>>
>>"A bad day doing photography is better
>> than a good day doing just about
>> anything else."
>>
>>The Unofficial Olympus Web Photo Gallery at:
>>
>> http://www.taiga.ca/~gallery/
>>
>>
>>< 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 >
>>
>>
>
>
>< 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 >
>
< 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 >
|