Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: 21/2 vs 21/3.5 (was: [OM] 28/2 or 35/2?)

Subject: Re: 21/2 vs 21/3.5 (was: [OM] 28/2 or 35/2?)
From: "C.H.Ling" <chling@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 08:58:04 +0800
I have own the 21/3.5 briefly (for two weeks and just sold), for close
distance the 21/2 perform much better than the 21/3.5 which has very
high field curvature. For distance objects and at F8, the 21/3.5
outperform the 21/2 at the edges and the 21/2 is very slightly better
at the center. But both are very fine and the different is not easy to
tell without extreme magnification. Without an extensive test but I
feel the 21/3.5 has slightly higher contrast.

C.H.Ling

plp@xxxxxxxx wrote:
> 
> >I wouldn't rush into a 21/2.  The 21/3.5 is a wonderful
> >lens and while I do own the 21/2, I am not sure it is
> >worth the extra money.
> 
> Does anyone else own both the 21/2 and 21/3.5, and can
> compare their performance? According to Gary's lens
> tests, both are excellent lenses. The greater light of
> the faster lens sure would be nice, but at a cost. Just
> how much better is the 21/2 over the 21/3.5?
> 
> Pete
>

< 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 >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz