14-45 also has bad vignetting.
___________________________________
John Hermanson
Camtech Photo Services, Inc.
21 South Lane, Huntington NY 11743
631-424-2121 | Olympus OM Service since 1977
http://www.zuiko.com | omtech1 AT verizon dot net
Jeff Keller wrote:
> The 14-54 does not have noticeable barrel distortion. I like it much
> more than the 14-45.
>
> Olympus is coming out with a 12-60 possibly in Oct-Nov.
> <http://olympus-europa.com/consumer/images/E-System_Lens_Roadmap_March_5th_2007.pdf>
>
> I believe the announcement on dpreview indicated it would be a "pro"
> lens putting its quality between the standard and top pro lenses.
>
> The 11-22 is a very nice lens.
>
> -jeff
>
> On 7/8/07, Tom Fenwick <super.wide@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> The 11-22 is probably slightly better, and offers some extra width for
>> the extra size, and makes a pretty good wide normal zoom, especially
>> combined with the 50/2 macro which is a great available light lens and
>> really just the right size for the 410... (If they would just make a
>> 25/2 and a 12/2 I'd be extremely happy.)
>>
>> Or you could wait for the 14-35/2 which might not be TOO much more
>> than the Pana/Leica zoom...
>>
>> Tom
>>
>> On 08/07/07, Nathan Wajsman <nathan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Having reviewed the first couple of hundred images taken with the E410
>>> and its 14-42mm kit lens, I have more or less concluded that I would
>>> like a better standard zoom than the 14-42. Specifically, I am a bit
>>> annoyed by the slowness of this lens, and by the quite visible barrel
>>> distortion at the 14mm end.
>>>
>
>>> If anyone has experience with those lenses, I would like to hear from you.
>>>
>>> Nathan
>
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|