On 1/20/2013 5:19 PM, Martin Walters wrote:
> ...
> For the wider angles, there seems to be some discussion starting about
> the relative merits of the 14/2.5, 17/1.8, 20/1.7 and 25/1.4.
Inevitable, with the release of the 17/1.8. New grist for the mill. :-)
> Almost an
> embarrassment of riches, though there seems to be a range of opinions on
> the relative merits of each lens (and I forgot the two Sigma lenses).
I was thinking only one fast prime, so wanted something normal-ish. So the 14
mm was out anyway. Expecting mostly indoor
use, I lean a little toward the wider side.
> In the 35-40mm range, seems like the 20mm is cheaper than the 17mm in
> the US, but not up here where they are the same price. In deed, all four
> fall in the range 450(14mm) to 599 (25mm).
The 17/1.8 and 25/1.4 are both $500, the 20/1.7 is $150 cheaper. It's also
appreciably smaller and lighter than the
other two, apparently with minimal price to pay in performance.
Point Seven Eight Seven Moose
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|