I'd second Chris's advice. If you also have a 35mm, or think you would
like one, (the 35/2.8 is great, small & light, & my standard lens.) then try
& get a 24mm. If you have a 50mm, then a 28/2.8 would be the next logical
step. Or hell, just buy 'em all, like I did!
Andy Gilbert
Exeter
Devon
England
**********Original Message:**********
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 07:48:01 -0700
> From: "Chris O'Neill" <coneill@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [OM] wide angle lens
>
> On 5 Feb 2001, at 14:28, ASHTON B.R. (179806) wrote:
>
> > I have a Birthday comming up and for it I'd like a wide angled lens so I
> > was hoping you'd be able to recommend a nice size for general scenic
> > photos.
>
> If you're on a budget, get yourself the 28/2.8 wide angle. Nice field of
> view, darned nice contrast and resolution. Runs 'bout US$100 or so.
>
> If you've got more money to spend, I recommend the 24/2.8 wide angle.
> A bit "fussier" about perspective (lining things ups so that vertical
lines
> remain perpendicular), but has *great* perspective and field of view and
> darned nice contrast and resolution.
>
> [Side Note: The 24/2.8 has become my "first choice" for a wide angle,
> and my 28/2.8 now doesn't get much use.]
>
> If you've got money to burn, there's the "faster" wide angles... 28/2,
> 24/2, or 21/2... but I can't comment on those cuz I don't have money to
> burn. :-((((
>
> Hope that helps...
>
> Regards,
>
> Chris
>
> - ---
> I'm *not* a Zuikoholic.... I'm a Zuikohobbiest!
> Chris O'Neill (coneill@xxxxxxxxxxx)
> http://www.nucleus.com/~coneill
< 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 >
|