> Yes, I agree, usually used for architectural stuff where the DOF is
> required.
Olympus made not one, but two shift lenses. The 24/shift is a
beautiful hunk of glass and commands top dollar.
I used to own a 35/shift. J Dubs has it now and he occasionally lets
me have visitation rights. For a long, long time, this was my normal
lens which was permanently mounted to my OM-2S.
Back to the humble 24/2.8 for a moment: One thing that I really
appreciate about this lens is the distortion correction. Although it
is not absolute grid-perfect, it is very natural and requires little
to no correction. One type of picture I like to do is sky-dominant.
So, I'll put the horizon down along the bottom edge of the frame. Most
lenses will screw up any straight edge in that position, but the
24/2.8 gets it nearly perfect. Other lenses are even straighter, but
that perfection comes at a price--both in size/price, but also in a
loss of the organic nature of the scene.
An example of this, which I hate to mention, is the Leica 21mm f/1.4
SUMMILUX-M ASPH. The lens is simply awesome, but the images from
it--especially nighttime shots, just don't look right.
When looking at pictures, you usually say to yourself "that was taken
with a long telephoto lens." Or, "that was taken with a wide-angle
lens". What I like about the 24/2.8 and the 28/2 is that they don't
tip their hand. These Zuiko wide-angle lenses just make the image look
like it was taken with a normal lens, but with a greater field of
view.
--
Ken Norton
ken@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.zone-10.com
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|