Le lundi 18 Juillet 2005 15:59, Martinez, Paul a écrit :
> I want a 28mm Zuiko and really like the idea of a F/2.0 lens, but many of
> the opinions I see posted talk about the F/3.5 lens having better "pop" in
> use. I'd be using it mainly for landscapes from F5.6-11.
I don't know the f/2, but I own a f/3.5, and I think you can't beat the value
for the money of the later ; basically, it's like the 50/1.8 : a see-through
body cap, ridiculously inexpensive, and one of the sharpest zuiko out there.
If I were you, I'd run for both of them. The /3.5 is so cheap that it
generaly doesn't impair your bank account enough to stop you from buying
the /2 if you were funded enough to consider it in the first place.
My basic setup when walking is an OM1 with the 28/3.5 ; you can't tell the
viewing angle from a couple of feet away, even if you know what an OM is, and
that makes targe^W innocent people wandering around less suspicious.
I happen to own a vivitar 28/2.5 (I had it first, along with the body), but I
haven't used it since I grabed the 3.5 off ebay ; not that the vivitar is
bad, as a performer it's surprisingly good, but its weight is a show stopper
to me ; plus, the 58 mm front diameter doesn't fit the never-ready case, so
it's now collecting dust on my shelves. The 1 stop in its favour is not
enough. Mutatis mutandis, I don't think you'd miss the /2 so badly.
--
Manuel Viet
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|