Hi George, Ken and all,
From: "DrT \(George Themelis\)" <drt-3d@xxxxxxx>
>Ken wrote:
>> my favorite "wide-angle" is 35mm focal length, but that's
>> because it's my "wide-normal". As a "normal" lens, I find 50mm too long
>> and 35mm just about right. 35mm is barely a wide-angle.
>
>Yes, same for me. In the area of stereo photography, the 35mm is the king.
It is, in fact, the chosen focal length for my setup:
<http://www.flickr.com/photos/zuiko21/3906486393/> ;^)
I hope to finish the roll(s) soon...
>I was surprised that the Olympus OM 35mm f2.8 lens was not easy to find. It
>is much easier (and cheaper) to find the 28mm and 50mm lenses.
Obviously, the 50mm would be the most popular lens on any brand --
especially the f/1.8 version, sold together with many bodies. But when most
people decided to purchase a wide-angle, the 35mm was too subtle -- the 28
does a more noticeable effect, while the 24 was more expensive, thus the
28's popularity.
>For wider angle stereo pictures I would use anything from 20-24mm.
Focal lengths is a matter of personal preference and aesthetic view... for
me, the 'real' standard is 40mm -- 45 won't do, and 35 adds nothing. 28mm is
a moderate wide-angle, and not every 24 feels better... Oly's 24s seem to be
wider than most other brands, plus they're excellent performers.
In the super-wide field, I had many years ago a no-name 18-28mm, by no means
stellar performer, but at least gave me first hand experience with wide
angles -- the 21 showed up as the "ideal" super-wide for me, 18 (even some
17s) add very little.
On the other hand... I have developed the first roll with my new-to-me CV
15mm f/4.5... wow, those 3 mm make A LOT of difference! I'm in the learning
curve, I'm afraid. I had in mind the CV 12mm f/5.6, but after the 15's
results, I now see it as a very specialized item.
>I am not
>a big fan of wide angle stereo photography.
I agree, I don't think it's possible to get a natural effect.
From: Ken Norton <ken@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>Don't forget, that an almost single-handed effort on my part kept the OM-2S
>from completely falling into a disrespected has-been pile. For quite some
>time the 2S was being dissed left and right and I alone stepped out in
>praise of the camera to raise it up to its rightful place.
While not my favourite OM body (that would be the 2n ;^) I acknowledge the
practical advantages of the 2S. In fact, it was the chosen body for my two
big trips (Senegal & Uruguay), together with the 40/2 and 85/2 -- the wide
angle being selected from 21/2 and 24/2.8.
Cheers,
--
Carlos J. Santisteban Salinas
IES Turaniana (Roquetas de Mar, Almeria)
<http://cjss.sytes.net/>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|