Nic,
I think I am probably one of this list's most avid users (and
supporters of)
the 24mm f/2.0 Zuiko. I absolutely adore this lens, my standard kit is
an OM-1n with 24/2.0 and 90/2.0 Macro (and, as I get used to hauling the
beast around, 250/2.0), these two lenses cover most of my needs,
and are oh-so-suhweet to use.
I have actually written a review of the 24/2.0, but never got around to
publishing it on the web, I'll get around to it sometime.
My experience is with a really old example of the 24/2.0, silver-nosed,
had a somewhat hard life, and glass slightly yellowed (I am still
convinced,
and there is some anecdotal evidence, that the first copies of this
lens made
around 1976 used radioactive glass like the early 55/1.2 etc).
The best thing about the 24/2.0 is how small and sexy it looks/handles
on an OM
body, it's just unbelievably tiny compared to any currently available
24mm.
The second best thing about this lens is its multiple personality, the
one
moment it can shoot crisp, sharp, deep DOF images (landscape,
interiors, etc)
the other moment, it can create unexpectedly shallow DOF when shooting
at f/2.0,
and preferably quite close-up (anything less than 1.5m is seriously
isolated).
It is, in my experience, an extremely sharp lens (pretty much at all
apertures,
and somewhat superior to a Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L MkI, which I used
to use).
The biggest flaw is that, wide open, the flare / haze can be obtrusive
if you're
shooting against very bright light sources, i.e. contrast is low,
especially towards
the edges.
My copy seems to hit peak performance at f/5.6, it's really very
impressive
then. It clearly out-resolves Ilford FP4 at that aperture, because I
get more
detail when I shoot Pan F (not that I can get my hands on Pan F
anymore around
here in South Africa...).
Anyway, it's a killer lens, so true to the ideal of the OM system,
small, sharp,
fast (f/2.0 was insane for a 24mm lens back then, even f/2.8 was
considered fast
for very wide angle lenses) and beautifully built. The floating
element makes
for equally good close-up performance.
My problem is that I don't have that many images online from this
lens, I am
focusing exclusively on wet printing, and have scanned only a small
portion of my
images, but here are some (I think many on this list has seen many or
all of these,
sorry for the repetition):
All these images are hand-held. This is what it can do at f/2.0 with
night lighting,
that's damn impressive on a 8x10in print for a 30+ years old lens. If
you look
closely though, it also shows the lens' greatest weakness where the
bars cross the
lights in the outer zones of the image: Pronounced flare. Still, it's
super super
sharp even at f/2.0.
http://fc04.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2009/358/6/8/Mothership_Bar_by_philosomatographer.jpg
These three were also at f/2.0, and at or close to minimum focus
distance, but shot on
ISO 3200 film, doesn't show resolution much:
http://fc07.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2009/358/b/3/Montecasino_Rearranged_by_philosomatographer.jpg
http://fc00.deviantart.net/fs48/f/2009/226/7/d/La_San_Marco_by_philosomatographer.jpg
http://fc02.deviantart.net/fs49/f/2009/200/6/c/It__s_in_your_hands_by_philosomatographer.jpg
These two were shot at the lens' optimum (f/5.6) and the birds shot
surprised me with the
clarity with which the bird's eye and feathers was rendered (close
focus performance due
to the floating element) and the truck shot, well, it's not a
fantastic shot, but it was
shot on Pan F, and "in the flesh" (the print) is probably the highest
resolution I've
thus far gotten from a 35mm print, every last rivet on the fuel tank
is perfectly
rendered.
http://fc08.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2010/052/1/e/Mutual_Care_by_philosomatographer.jpg
http://fc02.deviantart.net/fs51/f/2009/260/6/c/Proud_Truck_Driver_by_philosomatographer.jpg
Lastly, a quick environmental portrait, showing decent subject
isolation even at 1-2m distance,
as I said, it's a lens that has many sides, I find it extremely
versatile. My grainy
amateur B&W darkroom prints don't always show what this lens can do
yet, though, but at least
the negatives are there to re-print as I get better and better.
http://fc01.deviantart.net/fs51/f/2009/261/3/3/Starry_Eyed_by_philosomatographer.jpg
To sum up, this is one very special lens you can't go wrong with. And
it's still smaller
than the smallest 50mm from any other SLR system, and beautifully
designed.
Anybody else around here share my joy / experiences of this lens? I
know Ken loves the
24/2.8, but not as much as he loves his 35/2.8.
regards,
Dawid
On 01 Mar 2010, at 5:31 PM, Nicholas Herndon wrote:
> On a somewhat unrelated note, I want to hear some opinions on the
> 24mm f2.0
> Zuiko. There is a dearth of info on this particular lens.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|
