Moose
Sorry, it was probably the way I read it, but if you look at your post's first
paragraph you will see that you write that DPR was underwhelmed by the lens.
Later in that post you wrote that bit below, contradicting yourself.
Chris
On 30 Dec 2012, at 10:15, Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 12/29/2012 11:05 PM, Chris Barker wrote:
>> Moose's post was a little confusing on the reputation of the 20/1.7. When I
>> had one with my GF1, then E-PL2, it worked extremely well.
>
> I thought it was clear. All other folks opinions and tests; they say:
>
> Oly 17/2.8 = OK, but nothing to write home about. Sharp center, softening
> rapidly with radial distance.
> Panny 20/1.7 = excellent
> Oly 17/1.7 = likely excellent
>
> Clear Now Moose
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|