Hi Albert,
> Thanks for the advice..
You're welcome :)
> I am thinking about a 21mm now after reading a little bit, but composition
> is way too hard for my unskilled eyes to cope with.. So I think 24mm is
the
> lowest focal length I'll go.
This is something I can understand very well. For quite a long time I'd been
lusting for a 21/2. Then, I had the chance to obtain a 21/3.5 (silvernose,
SC) and/or a 24/2 (MC) as part of the payment for the Second Hand Cameras
website I made. I had a long think about it and I came to the conclusion
that I'm more likely to use the 24/2 much more, than the 21/3.5. I have to
admit that if the owner would have offered me the choice between a 24/2 and
a 21/2 I would probably have taken the 21/2, but looking backwards on it, I
think the 24mm focal length may suit me better, especially as I have taken a
liking for those "right in your face wide angle people shots", and I think
that the perspective one gets with a 24mm for these shots is about the limit
of what's acceptable...
Well, who knows, perhaps someday I'll add a 21mm, or even an 18mm or 16mm to
the line-up, but for now, I too am happy with a 24mm as lower focal length
limit.
> I have seen results from a 24mm/2.8 and I have enjoyed it, so I look
forward to it..
Definitely! It's a nice little lens that gives excellent results!
Cheers!
Olafo
< 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 >
|