The 24/2 sample I got is not that bad, I have tested the Zuiko wide lenses I
own,
following is my subjective comments (all tests are for distance objects):
-Distortion: the 24/2 has normal barrel distortion, slightly higher than the
35/2 and
28/2 but not too much. I would say it is around 1-1.5%, but distortion
concentrated
on center so a bit more noticeable (not evenly spread on the whole frame).
-Resolution: seems has higher field curvature, at wide open with uneven
sharpness
across the frame, overall only a little bit poorer than the 35/2 (the 28/2 I
had was
poorer in resolution at all apertures but may be it was only a bad sample so I
don't
want to put it to compare). When stop down to F4 both 24 and 35 are quite sharp
but
not as good as the 21/2.
- Light fall off: at wide open it is only a little bit poorer than 35/2 so it
is not
bad considering it is wider and its performance is sure much better than 18/3.5.
- Flare and ghost resistance is very good, especially ghosting, I can't
remember I
got an image that has ghosting with that lens, similar to 35/2? While I found
the
wide Zuiko which most subject to ghosting is the 18/3.5.
The 24/2 was my most favorable "standard" lens but now I carry the 21/2 more. I
once had a 9+ 24/2.8 MC, besides cooler color balance, I didn't found big
differnt
between these two lenses, but since I use only matte screen for focusing, a
faster
lens here makes bit different.
C.H.Ling
-----Original Message-----
From: Gary Reese <pcacala@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tuesday, January 25, 2000 1:59 PM
Subject: RE: [OM] Questions for the group
>Ron S. writes:
>
><< Gary: I'm certainly not a technohead but I'm wondering what your
>objection
>is to the 24 F2? >>
>
>1. Pronounced waveform distortion. This lens looks like it has an
>aspherical element in it. One can often detect an aspherical lens by
>straight lines being rendered as waves. I'll accept waveforming in a
>zoom, but in a prime?? I blindly SQF graded the results from this lens.
>I THOUGHT I was looking at the results of an IS-3 at 35mm . . .
>
>2. I think the wide open and one stop down performance, coupled with
>strong light fall-off ("my "vignetting") makes this a dicey choice for
>available light photography.
>
>3. Cost. For what you get in performance, it sure seems overpriced.
>
>Gary Reese
>Las Vegas, NV
>
>< 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 >
>
>
< 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 >
|