James,
While I have not used the 24 f2, I have used the 24 f2.8 extensively,
especially for landscapes. I doubt that you would miss the f2 at all. I never
shoot with the f2.8 wide open as it is. The fact that it is lighter, more
compact, and takes 49 mm filters are all factors that work in it's favor.
Additionally if some disaster should befall the lens, it is much cheaper to
replace the 2.8 than the f2. I would take the f2.8 and have a good time.
Jim Couch
james olson wrote:
> I just received a 24/2.8 from a list member.... I've had a 24/2 for years.
> I will be heading to Utah for a week of photography on Thursday. I am
> planning on shooting on a tripod quite a bit...
>
> I've read the lens reviews, and both get "A" gradings at F/ 5.6 to 8....
> which is where I would shoot landscapes.
>
> My question: as I won't be needing the extra stop of light, will I be just
> as happy with the 24/2.8 for landscape work? I would really welcome
> comments from people that have used both.
>
> The 49mm filter size is a plus, too. Travel kit: 24/2.8, 50/3.5, 100/2.8.
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
>
> < 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 >
--
Jim Couch
Tacoma, WA USA
< 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 >
|