Hi guys,
Well, it happened, a major Zuik-fix was way overdue, so last Friday I
indulged myself with just that! :)
Indeed, I visited the store I'm making the page for and had a look through
the OM section of the gear. I had already mentioned to the owner that part
of the payment could consist of Oly stuff, so here I was like a small child
who has just been taken by their parents to a toy store, allowed to pick out
something. :)
The selection of OM gear at said store is not bad, but to be honest (and to
speak, for once, in a NOT Zuikoholic way), I have almost everything I really
need Oly-wise, so my attention was of course quickly drawn towards the super
wide angles. As mentioned, two of them were of particular interest, being
the cute silver nose 21/3.5 and the lovely like new 24/2. As always, asking
the question "which one to pick?" to the list didn't help me much at all:
some people support the 24s, about equally many support the 21s, the Oly
documentation speaks of "The epochal performance of the 24/2..." as well as
the very good performance of the both 21mm lenses, and to complicate matters
further, I was suggested to go for an 18/3.5 as well :))) O.k., my own
fault. How was I to suspect a clear and unanimous winner would be picked out
by a bunch of Zuikoholics? ;) Thanks nonetheless, for all the great input,
it's definitely appreciated, and though not unanimous, it did help me.
Sooo, the decision was upon myself. As mentioned previously, I tried the
21/3.5 briefly on a body, and compared it to the 24/2.8. Not quite the same
as using both lenses in side to side comparisons for actually taking
pictures, but still indicative nonetheless. Then, over the past two years
I've gradually been working on obtaining a "core-line-up" of fast lenses,
which I want to carry for most of the photographic situations. Three members
of the core line-up were determined already previously, these are the 28/2
(still my favourite normal wide angle), the 35-80/2.8 and the 100/2. So,
logically spoken, a 21/2 lens would be what I'd like to have next to these 3
core lenses. However, due to the absense of such a lens at the store, it
would now have to be either the 21/3.5 or the 24/2 (I decided not to ask for
the both of them, as I do need the cash part of the deal too, and I really
don't want to get too many lenses either). Looking at the above core lenses
program, the seemingly small difference between the angles of the 21mm vs.
the 24mm, and the simple fact that the 24/2 was a CLEAN and smart looking
lens, I decided to go for that one. The dirty deed was done, the choice had
been made: speed wan over the wider angle, and I felt the cold steel of the
lens in my hands.
All said and done, I noticed a small TTL cord box in the OM cabinet. It was
the box for the 0.3m TTL T Cord which I was still looking for for combining
with the PBG2! I asked if I could get that as well and that was fine. The
box looked a bit as if the cord was put in there in a hurry, as it didn't
close well and there was a bump on one side. Happier than any child could
possibly be, I left for home and over there I gave the items a closer look.
I started off with the small thingie, the TTL cord. Well, lo and behold!
Upon opening the box, it turned out that the "bump" in the box was formed
by... A TTL AUTOCONNECTOR T20!!! Indeed, another of those pesky items I was
looking out for. To complete matters, on the other end of the cord was
attached a TTL Connector Type 4! These were two unexpected treasures which
are very welcome (especially the T20 connector). I will mention this to the
shop owner, but I'm positive he will have no issue with me keeping them. :)
Then the 24/2, aaaaah yes, the 24/2. Boy, does this lens look GOOD and feel
right. I mounted it on the camera, looked around and I was greeted by a
lovely BRIGHT wide view in the viewfinder. I gave the lens a further spin
and I have to say that the first impressions are very good, I think this is
one of those "love at first sight" Zuiko's, just like the 100/2 was. After
playing around, I did what any Zuikoholic would do: I grabbed the OM lens
handbook, and some other lens flyers etc. and re-read the parts about the
21/2, 21/3.5 and the 24/2, also, I deliberately looked for pictures taken by
the 24/2. Various of the lovely Antarctica pictures in the OM lens handbook
are taken by that lens, and they are great, very encouraging. Happier than
ever, I couldn't wait until the next day (as in the meantime it had gone
dark already), to play with the lens outside. So, the next day came, and a
beautiful one it was at that, bright sunny weather. I had to dedicate the
biggest part of the day on actually building a part of the page I'm making
for the store owner, so I decided to wait for later in the afternoon (nicer
light) to give the lens a bit of work-out. I started off with an indicative
test for distortions, so, in came the notorious "drunk wall" (as Joel likes
to call it ;) ) again that I also used to test for the 35-80/2.8's barrel
distortion. This time, I didn't have access to the Manfrotto tank tripod, so
I just used my lightweight Giottos tripod. I did my best to level the camera
as much as possible (but may have failed a bit), and took a shot with the
following lenses (all at f5.6): 24/2, 24/2.8, 28/2, 28/3.5. Not wanting to
waste the precious few rolls of E100VS I have on too many test shots, I left
the tests at that and decided to take some real pictures. There are a few
trees which are in full bright autumn colours, so it was a nice moment to
take some ultra-beefed up colour shots: first, I took some pictures using
the 100/2 "au naturel", then with a polariser, and then with a Tiffen
Enhancing filter (= didymium). In the meantime, the golden hours were there,
so the combination of E100VS + didymium + golden hours should yield results
of leaves that are beyond red. Unfortunately, the only didymium filter I
have is a 49mm one, so I had to use a stepping down ring. This is no issue
for the 100/2, but it obviously was for the 24/2. Taking the imminent
vignetting for granted, I decided to shoot a few shots with this filter on
the 24/2 as well. Also, the 24/2 of course also went au-naturel. I hope the
vignetting is not too bad, but I'm quite positive it will be rather
pronounced. Then came the last test for now: I performed a small indicative
24/2.8 (SC) vs. 24/2 (MC) flare test: I included the bright sun in the upper
left corner of the picture taken with the 24/2.8 and then took the same shot
with the 24/2. With both lenses, flare could be seen in the viewfinder. The
flare appeared to be a it stronger with the 24/2.8 than with the 24/2 (no
surprises there), but I'll have to see what the end results are like.
So, all in all, I had a great Zuikoholic weekend, and it seems the 24/2 will
become the latest and greatest in my core line-up. Should, for some reason,
at a later time I decide I do desire the 21/2 over the 24/2 after all, I can
of course try to make that switch. For now, I'll first await the results, as
it seems the 24mm focal length is really starting to grown on me. :))))
Cheers!
Olafo
< 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 >
|