On Fri, 15 Feb 2002 T.Clausen@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> I'd second that. It fits the gap between the 50/1.8 and the 24/2.0
> perfectly. 35/2.0 and 85/2.0 are among my favourites, part of the
> "tag-along" kit ;)
(replying to myself here....)
While the 35/2 and 85/2 often go hand in hand when I go somewhere, I have
to say that my 24/2.0 by far is my prefered wide-angle. A little less
"ordinary" perspective than the 35/2, and quite sharp. However also a
little bigger.
I guess that if I was to choose, I would be hard pressed to chose between
the 35/2.0. A good thing I am not and cna keep both ;)
--thomas
>
> On Thu, 14 Feb 2002, Peter Dixon wrote:
>
> > Have to gently disagree with AG on this, I think the 35/2 is a great,
> > and underated and hence undervalued lens
> >
> > Pete
> >
> > (off to polish his 35/2.......)
> >
> >
>
>
--
-------------------------------------------
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 >
|