>
>In particular, the 16mm fisheye is generally cheaper than the 18mm, and
>underrated. Until I ended up with one as part of a whole-system purchase, I
>wouldn't have thought to get one, thinking it a "novelty" or "special
>purpose" lens, limited to special effects.
>
>The thing to keep in mind is that any line that passes through the center
>will be straight. So while it looks distorted when in a building (because
>of all the straight lines, impossible to have all going through the
>center), it is wonderful for sweeping foreground-to-background scenics,
>because you generally only have one line to worry about -- the horizon.
>
I agree with Jan. I had both and still have the 16mm. I didn't do any formal
testing but had the opinion from shooting that the 16 is better than the 18. I
wasn't too impressed with the 18... a lot of fall-off. It did seem that the 16
is both more flare-resistant and less susceptible to vignetting.
Still, I'm not sure that I would buy the 16 before the 18... The 18 has more
applications, overall.
________________________________
Regards,
Denton Taylor
Photogallery at www.dentontaylor.com.
Panoramas and Immersive Imaging at
www.threehundredsixty.com
< 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 >
|