============================
Well, here is my plan - goodby 24mm f2 and 35mm f2 and hello 21mm f3.5,
28mm f2 and 35-80mm f2.8.
============================
that would be reasonable if you don't mind forking over $2500 USD for
3 lenses. An alternative plan would be just to go with 21/3.5 + 35/2
or a Sigma 24/2.8 + 35/2. The 28/2 is a fine lens by all accounts,
but it is expensive compared to the 35/2.
Another point is that if you already own a 24/2, you can make fine
images with it. Distortion is only an issue if you are doing things
like architectural photography, and the 21/3.5 is too slow for
interiors.
I can't really interpret much from the jpeg file Gary gave the URL from.
When I purchased a 24/2 new, I tested for vignetting by shooting a plane
white wall at all apertures, and tested for distortion by doing a
shot of a uniform brick wall focused near infinity. What I saw
was pronounced barrel distortion, not waveform, but my guess is that
the corners pincushion out as it is focused more closely so that
the distortion becomes waveform in nature at closer focusing distances.
The 24/2 does not distort more than a 3rd party lens and is comparable
to the 24/2.8 in distortion. It is a reasonable lens, I just think
that at the price, Olympus should have done a better job. But I also
think they should have done a better job with the contrast level of
the 24/2.8.
Joseph
< 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 >
|