Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] Re: 21mm F2 and 24mm f2 - worth the extra over the slower 21 and 24

Subject: [OM] Re: 21mm F2 and 24mm f2 - worth the extra over the slower 21 and 24 zuikos?
From: Martin Walters <mwalters@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 15:35:06 -0500
For the 21mm Zuiko, I couldn't justify the extra cost (getting close to 
x2) and aside from wide open performance (ie the extra stop and a bit), 
there is very little difference in Gary's lens tests.  I wanted a 21mm 
to try out as I found my self wanting wider fields of view (than my 
28mm). My 21 is a late model ("Zuiko") with telltale green reflections. 
It's small and fun to use. so I'm happy­. Have to be careful with 
"clutter" at the frame edges when composing, but that's always going to 
be a problem with such a wide angle of view.  If money were no object, I 
would no doubt have got an 21/2.

I have always used a 28mm as my wide angle (a 3.5, now upgraded to a 
later model 28/2). I have been happy with the angle of view, and as 
Winsor and others have noted in the past, the 21 and 28 are a nice 
progression.  Perhaps one day I might buy a 24/2.8 just to see what that 
focal length is like. However, that's for another day when other more 
desirous items have been acquired.  One reason for faster lenses is 
"fading eyesight" - and I appreciate a bright viewfinder more and more.


Martin

Winsor Crosby wrote:

>I had the same question when I was buying Zuiko OM lenses. I was 
>impressed by Galen Rowell who opted for the 24.2.8 Nikon because fast 
>wide angle lenses have more elements and tend more to flare and 
>ghosting when shooting outside. That and the price convinced me to get 
>the slower versions of the 21 and the 24.  I kind of wish I had gotten 
>the 21/2 because of its reputed ease of focus and of course its ability 
>to be used hand held in lower light. But it was very expensive at the 
>time for me. I don't think you will find any significant difference in 
>the quality of the images.
>
>Just an additional thought about lens spread. I almost stopped using 
>the 21 after I got the 24. They really are very close visually and I 
>found the the 24 to be a wonderful all around wide angle lens and 
>easier to use than the 21. The reason for 28/2 test being so good is 
>that it was a premiere lens by Olympus. It was about this period that 
>faster lenses began to be designed not just faster, but better as well. 
>If I had the 28 I would get the 21/2 and forget the 24 entirely.
>
>
>
>Winsor
>Long Beach, California, USA
>On Mar 23, 2005, at 3:51 AM, jking@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
>  
>
>> my
>>question is it worth buying the 21mm and 24mm F2s? when I already have 
>>the
>>24mm F2.8 and 21mm f3.5.
>>    
>>
>
>
>==============================================
>List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
>List nannies:        olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
>==============================================
>
>
>  
>

-



==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================

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