OTOH, I opted to mostly ignore the 21 and 28 and go with the 24 as my standard
wide angle. I sold my 21/3.5. The 24/2 that I have now better matches my view
of a wide angle and makes a nice pair with a 35 or 50. I found that the 21 was
often too wide and the 28 didn't feel wide enough, or the 28 was too close to
my favorite, the 35.
Differnt strokes, huh?
Skip
----- Original Message ---------------
Subject: [OM] Re: 21mm F2 and 24mm f2 - worth the extra over the slower 21
and24 zuikos?
From: Winsor Crosby <wincros@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 10:05:14 -0800
To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
...........
>
>Just an additional thought about lens spread. I almost stopped using
>the 21 after I got the 24. They really are very close visually and I
>found the the 24 to be a wonderful all around wide angle lens and
>easier to use than the 21. The reason for 28/2 test being so good is
>that it was a premiere lens by Olympus. It was about this period that
>faster lenses began to be designed not just faster, but better as well.
>If I had the 28 I would get the 21/2 and forget the 24 entirely.
>
>
>
>Winsor
>Long Beach, California, USA
>On Mar 23, 2005, at 3:51 AM, jking@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
>> my
>> question is it worth buying the 21mm and 24mm F2s? when I already have
>> the
>> 24mm F2.8 and 21mm f3.5.
>
>
>==============================================
>List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
>List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
>==============================================
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|