I think I'll compare it to something much more equivalent. The Canyon
35/2.0, a prime with the same angle of coverage. The Canyon has a
little better resolution, half the chroma, half the vignetting and half
the distortion ... and it's a stop faster for about the same price
($300). You don't always get what you think you're paying for.
Canon 35/2.0
<http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/147/cat/10>
Olympus 17/2.8
<http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1276/cat/14>
Chuck Norcutt
Clay Nichols wrote:
> A low end Mercedes is a low end car. A low end lens is a low end lens. There
> ain't no glass there. You get what you pay for.
> Clay
>
>>>> "Jeff Keller" <om-list@xxxxxxxxxxx> 09/28/09 7:11 PM >>>
> The Zuiko 17mm has a msrp of $299 putting it in the lowest/cheapest lens
> category Olympus has. Olympus should be flattered that you are trying to
> compare it to $2500 lens (Canon 17mm TS-E). I'm happy that Olympus has been
> coming out with some interesting new ideas at affordable prices. Hopefully
> they will look at the response the market place has and use the knowledge to
> also build innovative, top end lenses and cameras that sell very well.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|