I am also the one who keep the 24/2 and sold the 24/2.8. But with different
reason, I own the 24/2 for over ten years. When the time I only got around
six Zuikos, this lens was always accompany with me together with the 85/2
and 50/3.5, sometimes also add a 35/2. This combination works very well for
my family shots. The 24/2 gave me fine results, its resolution was fine
although sharpness was not high.
I got a 24/2.8 SC before the 24/2, which was very sharp but the picture came
out very harsh. The problem was partially due to an element group turned
yellow, so it was sold. Last year I try to find a 24/2.8 because in some
situation I want to have picture that come out looks very sharp, I expected
the 24/2.8 will be sharper. Finally I got a 9+ 24/2.8 MC from ebay, I
immediately made some test shot together with the 24/2. The result was very
disappointed, at F4 to F8 I can hardly find any different between the two in
terms of sharpness and resolution (the color also looks very close in the
prints, as it was negative not slide, so I cannot confirm the color
rendering). Finally I decided not to keep the 24/2.8 because it gives no
gain on top of the 24/2.
Talking about the 40/2, it is a rare lens, forget about trading it with a
35/2 and 50/1.4. Probably a 50/1.2 plus a 35/2 can worth the same.
C.H.Ling
-----Original Message-----
From: Reuben Acciano <rubydoomsday@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Cheers for the feedback on the 24mm f2, chaps (and lassies if this is
>relevant).
>
>I have extensive experience of the 24mm f2.8 and, believe me, it was a
>storming lens - I wish I had it now. The primary reason for picking up the
>f2 is that, in conjunction with the 85 f2, I am getting them at a bargain
>price. And, to reiterate, the brighter finder image really does assist
>focussing in a dark halll with smoke machines going nuts around you etc.
>
>I was intrigued by a posting on the 40 mm f2 - I have the same dillema with
>my 35mm f2 and 50 1.4; I never know which to include in my single lens kit
>when just roaming the streets (I never leave the house without my OM4Ti or
>at the VERY least a MJU II). The 40mm f2 seems like the ideal compromise
>lens, in that I could cram in street scenes from close quarters, but
without
>producing the "moon faces" on the frames edge, that can be got with the 35
>or a 28. If anyone has one, I will seriously consider swapping my EXC++ 35
>f2 inc. caps and leather case for a similar condition 40mm f2. I have heard
>this lens is viciously sharp, despite some problems with vignetting when
>combined with a polariser .... any thoughts? I may even consider bundling
my
>50mm 1.4 with the 35 if it will sway someone with this rare lens to come
>across ... I love the performance of the 50, it just doesn't seem to hold a
>place in my spectrum of lengths as important as it once did.
>
>Anyway, comments would be welcomed.
>
>BTW - Simon E, I have actually been to rural Wales - my ex-girlfriend and I
>holidayed there while visting her family in Dec 99. Bloody cold, but bloody
>beautiful too! The faithful 4Ti chewed through much film, I can tell you
...
>
>
>______________________________________________
>FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
>Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup
< 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 >
|