At 10:05 PM 24/03/99 -0800, Glen Lowry wrote:
[snip]
>I love wide angles and was looking at picking up a 24/2, 28/2, or 35/2-- and
>possibly a 21. And I was hoping, I might get some advice from those of you
>using these lenses. Are there any of these fast wides (SC/MC) that I should
>steer clear of? I've seen Gary Reese's test page--a real treat--but noticed
>that there was no listing for the 28/2; so what's the skinny on this lens.
I've got nothing objective to say about this lens, but I own it (the MC
version), and subjectively, couldn't be more pleased. My wife and I are going
to France in the near future, and she's insisted that I *not* bring along every
lens in the stable, so the 28/2.0 and the 100/2.0 are getting the nod, along
with one body (either the 2S or the 4).
I've found the 28/2.0's performance to be good even wide open, and in
particular I'm happy with the combination of relatively wide coverage with
almost zero barrel distortion. I've also found photos taken with this lens to
have a certain "snap" that I'm hard-pressed to explain rationally, but there
you have it. In many cases, the 28/2.0 has replaced the 50/1.8 or the 50/1.4
as my single lens of choice for the OM body.
As for the 21/2.0, own that one too, and love it, but there is perceptibly more
distortion than the 28/2.0, and it definitely displays lateral at the edges.
But for outdoor vistas, it's awesome. Never used any Zuiko wider than the 21,
though, so couldn't comment. Oh yeah, nothing like quick snaps with the 21 --
it's really tolerant of poorly-adjusted focus. ;-)
Garth
"A bad day doing photography is better
than a good day doing just about
anything else."
The Unofficial Olympus Web Photo Gallery at:
http://www.taiga.ca/~gallery/
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|