I hate my 28mm...it's an f2.8.. (yes yes yes, I know, Moose is sick of hearing
me say that) Wide open, it is very soft, but I have found at f5.6 or lower,
it's not bad at all. I do like the size and weight of it though, and the 49mm
thread makes it compatible with my 50/f1.8. Of course, I am a bit biased,
because the other two lenses I own are the 50/f1.8 and a 90mm/f2.5 Tokina
Macro, both of which are tack sharp... So it might be the case that the 28mm
is sharp, just not compared to these other two lenses...
Tokina has a 28mm/f2.8 that's $78 at B&H BRAND NEW. The performance is not
bad, you can take a look at it in photodo... It got a 3.4 on the photodo
score...
Albert
----- Original Message -----
From: Pete Prunskunas
To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 2:20 PM
Subject: [OM] 28mm f2.0 versus 28mm f2.8
The lens tests at
http://members.aol.com/olympusom/lenstests/default.htm
suggest that the difference between the 28mm f2.0 and 28mm
f2.8 are as follows: the f2.0 is sharper but has noticeable barrel
distortion, while the f2.8 is the opposite (but is much cheaper).
The lens tests at
http://www.photodo.com/prod/lens/35lensesmtf.shtml#Olympus
do not include both lenses, but the grade for the f2.0 is only a
2.6/5.0, only average. Considering that I use my wide angles
mainly to photograph buildings, I think the f2.8 is the better lens
considering the lessened barrel distortion. Any comments?
Pete
|