Hi Andrew:
I think Bill meant alternative. At any rate I let the 18 slide but bid the
16, I figure it will be a fun lens and a learning experience. Plus a great
big easy to unload if you don't like it factor.
Gord
----- Original Message -----
From: "andrew fildes" <afildes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <olympus@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, February 07, 2004 9:24 PM
Subject: [OM] 16 or 18 - was Re: Tamron 180mm f2.5
> >In a message dated 2/6/2004 11:50:10 PM Central Standard Time,
> >gordross@xxxxxxx writes:
> >What about the 16 and the 18 which would you say is the one to buy?
> >Both and if you can't afford that, the Tamron SP 17mm. I like the old
version
> >with the built in filters. If you are going with the Zuikos you will
likely
> >find more applications for the 18mm, however I really like the 16mm.
Both are
> >fairly specialized lenses and I do think the 17mm Tamron is a good
> >compromise. Bill Barber
> >
>
> I would hardly describe the 17 as a compromise between the 16 and 18
> - but rather as a substitute for the 18. The 16mm is a whole
> different class of lens and far harder to use. It's field of view is
> wider than the Voigtlander 15mm and 12mm I own as they are
> rectilinear, not fisheye. But it is a wonderful lens if you're a wide
> freak like me. The 18 or 17 are far more 'useful' - you make a choice
> between rectilinear with nice straight lines but light fall off in
> the corners, or fish with difficult distortions and a 'special
> effect' application.
> AndrewF
>
> The olympus mailinglist olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
> To unsubscribe: mailto:olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
>
> To contact the list admins:
mailto:olympusadmins@xxxxxxxxxx?subject="Olympus List Problem"
The olympus mailinglist olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: mailto:olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
To contact the list admins: mailto:olympusadmins@xxxxxxxxxx?subject="Olympus
List Problem"
|