Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] Re: 21/2 v 21/3.5 (was Re: Fremont, Seattle)

Subject: [OM] Re: 21/2 v 21/3.5 (was Re: Fremont, Seattle)
From: "C.H.Ling" <ch_photo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 12:53:40 +0800
I have no F2.8 wide angles anymore, my test done on film in the pass shown
21/3.5 perform very close to 21/2 when stopped down to F8. 21/3.5 was better
at the corner and 21/2 better at center.

For my sample of 50/1.4 (1.09M) and 24/2 silver nose, the result are very
similar at around 1:40 at F8. For distance objects, among my samples of
21/2, 24/2 and 28/2, 24/2 is the best.

http://www.accura.com.hk/24F2AF8.jpg

http://www.accura.com.hk/50F14AF8.jpg

C.H.Ling


On 25/02/2008, Andrew Fildes <afildes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>  Wasn't there a suggestion that the fast OM wide angles weren't as
>  good as their more modest, slower siblings on digital? (such as the
>  much praised 21/3.5)
>  Certainly, I've found my silver-nose 24/2 to be much softer than a
>  later 50/1.4 (1.07 mill. s.n.) in a studio situation, both stopped
>  down to F11 and 16,  although I didn't do any rigorous testing.
>
> Andrew Fildes
>  afildes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>


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

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