On Wed, 11 Jul 2001, John A. Lind wrote:
> At 12:35 7/11/01, Oben Candemir wrote:
> >No hehehe you are right :) Nor the 35 /2. But I think I have the good stuff.
> >
> >I probably will never get the 85/2, 50/2 nor the 20/2, or 35/2.
>
> The 85/2 and 35/2 are unsung heroes of the Zuikos. I don't see myself
I second that. My 85/2.0 never (*NEVER* - dammit) leave my side, and I
would even be interrested in a second one, should such come around (often,
I carry two bodies with different films, and I hate changing lenses).
<SNIP>
> The 35/2 is very forgiving of unnatural perspectives created by room
> corners shooting indoors in tight quarters. Much more so than the 28mm or
> especially the 24mm (but not quite as much as the 40/2). There are two
> popular sequences of focal lengths going from super-wide to standard that
> have a natural jump between them in the perspectives rendered:
> a. 21 --> 28 --> 50
> b. 18 --> 24 --> 35 --> 50
>
<SNIP>
I own the 24/2.0 as my only wide-angle. Got it mint from Giles (for a very
fair price in a very fair trade), and I absolutely love it. However never
having tried the 35/2, I am curious if anyone have experiences /
observations to share. I might consider a second wide-angle, and while the
24/2 has served me well (and a second one thus might be a viable option),
it could be fun to try either 21 or 35.
--
-------------------------------------------
Thomas Heide Clausen
Civilingeniør i Datateknik (cand.polyt)
M.Sc in Computer Engineering
E-Mail: T.Clausen@xxxxxxxxxxxx
WWW: http://www.cs.auc.dk/~voop
-------------------------------------------
< 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 >
|