Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] 21/2 v 21/3.5 (was Re: Fremont, Seattle)

Subject: [OM] 21/2 v 21/3.5 (was Re: Fremont, Seattle)
From: "Tom Fenwick" <super.wide@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 16:15:30 -0800
If I get a chance I will test this...  I would want to compare both at
about f8, and also both wide open at the iso's required to get the
same shutter speed.  It would be nice if the 3.5 won both rounds as it
is a fair bit smaller, lighter and cheaper!

Tom

On 25/02/2008, Andrew Fildes <afildes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>  Wasn't there a suggestion that the fast OM wide angles weren't as
>  good as their more modest, slower siblings on digital? (such as the
>  much praised 21/3.5)
>  Certainly, I've found my silver-nose 24/2 to be much softer than a
>  later 50/1.4 (1.07 mill. s.n.) in a studio situation, both stopped
>  down to F11 and 16,  although I didn't do any rigorous testing.
>
> Andrew Fildes
>  afildes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
>
>  On 26/02/2008, at 9:30 AM, Tom Fenwick wrote:
>
>  > Some experiments with the E-3 and newly stabilised 21/2.  After the
>  > 12-60 the c.a. is alarming although it seems to clear up ok in
>  > Lightroom.  There is also noticeable barrel distortion, but there is a
>  > nice clarity to the files and it's close to the focal length I like...
>  >
>  > http://www.pbase.com/tom_77/fremont
>
>
>
>
> ==============================================
>  List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
>  List nannies:        olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
>  ==============================================
>

==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz