Hi,
If I were you, I'd keep the 24mm. I have a 24, 28 and 35 and the 24mm is the
wide angle I use most of the time, the 35mm range being covered with zoom
lenses. But that counts for landscape and general photography. For concerts the
28mm gets used pretty often, though, but that is determined by the stage
dimensions.
Regards,
Bernd Moeller
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Dropkin" <steve@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2002 6:08 PM
Subject: [OM] 35/2.0 vs 24/2.8
> In trading some (non-Olympus) camera equipment I don't need
> complicating life, I have come across the opportunity to trade my
> 24/2.8 Zuiko for a 35/2.0 Zuiko.
>
> I'm wondering what this really does for me. Not having money to spend
> in this area right now, it pretty much would have to be a trade,
> though I would consider getting the 35 and then selling either it or
> the 24 off the auction sites (haven't sold before and I really just
> don't want to get started). The 35's price is fair, not a Fang.
>
> My current lenses are the 24/2.8, the 50/1.8, and the 135/3.5 (all
> Zuiko). I find the three make a good set, though a 100 would make a
> better progression.
>
> I know the Zuikoholic answer is "you need them all," but I would need
> some pretty strong arguments that the 35 adds _that_ much to the
> repertoire that it justifies the expense of buying it with the 24 and
> the 50. Being relatively new to 35mm SLR photography, I think I
> should spend more time practicing picture composition and lighting
> effects than choosing lenses, so the fewer lenses, the better (at
> least for now). And I'll be buying a house this year, so cleaning up
> outstanding loans and saving for curtains and late-night "home
> improvements" is taking front stage right now.
>
> Other trading choices are the 100/2.0 Zuiko or a Vivitar 75(?)-205
> macrofocusing zoom (knew I shoulda written that one down). (N.B. that
> these are not all "even-up" trades for the 24/2.8; I probably could
> swing the cash difference between one of those and the traded
> equipment.)
>
> So what says the group? I recall a somewhat similar conversation
> about wide-to-normal lenses not too long ago, but I don't know where
> to find an archive for 2001/2002 discussions. Can someone point me in
> the right direction?
>
> Thanks in advance!
> Steve
>
> < 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 >
>
>
< 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 >
|