There is a big difference between 21, 18 and 15 especially when you're
taking pictures inside of a house. (Mark must live among houses having
bigger rooms than I am).
My experience for outdoor photos is that for larger print sizes, I
like to use shorter focal lengths. With a 6x7 format camera, I'm
almost always using my shortest lens, 43mm, since I intend to make
larger prints. This seems logical since I generally view a large print
at the same distance as a small print. By being closer to the large
"wide ange" image it appears more like it would in real life. The
affect is like looking out of a window.
I have no experience with the Tamron. I've used a Nikon 15mm f3.5 on a
Canon 5D; it is incredibly sensitive to flare. The Zuiko 18mm is a
jewel.
-jeff
On 3/30/07, OM4Ti <OM4Ti@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Martin,
> I can not comment on the Tamaron lenses as I have never used one.
> However, I have extensively used the 18mm Zuiko. It is one of my all
> time favorite lenses. I find it great for doing interior shots for real
> estate. It allows the whole room of average size houses to get into one
> picture. It also gives stunning landscapes.
>
>
> Mark
>
>
> On 3/30/07, Walters, Martin <mwalters@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> SNIP!
> >
> > I have a OMZ 21mm, which is fun to use, but needs reasonably careful
> > composition to avoid strange effects around the edges. I've never
> > used a 17 or 18mm superwide, so what does the extra 3-4mm of FL give
> > you - both good and bad? I realize this type of lens is probably a
> > specialty lens and its usefulness depends on individual tastes and
> > shooting style. I'd be grateful for any comments from list members,
> > based on their experiences, whether lenses of this FL offer that much
> > more than a 21mm (given the price of an OMZ 18mm, I would likely be
> > looking at a Tamron).
>
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|