Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,536   Posts: 1,572,723   Online: 774
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 24
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Adirondacks
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,580
    Quote Originally Posted by GarageBoy View Post
    I actually like using wides close up to exaggerate size differences. I know the Olympus 24 2.8 and the 28 2.8 does not employ CRC/Floating Elements, but are they sharper than their Nikon counterparts?
    The Nikon FA/FE/FM series are the perfect size for me, but I've never tried an Olympus. Plus the black OM bodies look so sleek.

    Or am I just thinking about the grass being greener on the other side?
    Bingo. Personally I'd stick with the Nikkors, and I have two Oly bodies, a 3 and a 4. I've never used them.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Washington, the state
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,160
    Images
    16
    The OM Zuiko 21mm f2.0, 24mm f2.0 and 28mm f2.0 lenses all include floating element design to correct for close focus aberrations. The down side is that they are more expensive.
    Dave

    "She's always out making pictures, She's always out making scenes.
    She's always out the window, When it comes to making Dreams.

    It's all mixed up, It's all mixed up, It's all mixed up."

    From It's All Mixed Up by The Cars

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    531
    Images
    133
    Quote Originally Posted by E. von Hoegh View Post
    Bingo. Personally I'd stick with the Nikkors, and I have two Oly bodies, a 3 and a 4. I've never used them.
    May be you should have

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Adirondacks
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,580
    Quote Originally Posted by Ulrich Drolshagen View Post
    May be you should have
    I had and used Olympi ( a 2 and a 4) years ago; the equipment I have now was my late father's.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Hawaii
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    716
    All the Nikkor 24's 2.8 and 2 have always had CRC, even the old crusty ones. Great lens.

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    191
    Close focusing with WA is a 'must have' for me

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Adirondacks
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,580
    Quote Originally Posted by RidingWaves View Post
    All the Nikkor 24's 2.8 and 2 have always had CRC, even the old crusty ones. Great lens.
    This is true. http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography...wides/24mm.htm

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    282
    All three Zuiko 28's are very good lenses. As I recall, there is some slight variation in tonal rendering, but they all give excellent results. The f3.5 is often poo-pooed as a "slow lens" and as such is very inexpensive, but is a good performer with a respected reputation among Zuikoholics. And it is tiny, even by Olympus standards. I have taken landscape shots with a flower within inches of the lens with everything in focus to infinity, and gotten great results. Even the f2 is small by comparison to other manufacturers. The three 28's and the 24f2.8 all fit into two regular pockets in my lens case.

    Like any Zuiko, the 24f2.8 is a very good lens. It got some use in a trip to Cambridge where restricted space inside buildings and along higgledy-piggledy streets made framing very difficult. Personally I find 24mm difficult to use. Large, close objects end up being distorted and distant objects just get lost; it is the high end of the "gimmicky" wides where you trying for an effect and not a realist photo.

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Mission Viejo, California
    Shooter
    127 Format
    Posts
    1,487
    The 24mm/2.8 OM Zuiko is an excellent lens. It is razor sharp and has great contrast and color rendition. I have read contemporary comparisons of this lens to its big name rivals and it topped them all.

    The 28mm/2.8 is nearly its equal with less perspective concern.

    And the 28mm/3.5 is probably the best travel/street lens. In daylight set it to f/5.6 or 8 and pre-focus for 4-30ft. Makes an excellent point-and-shoot. Shoot from the hip and never miss a shot.

    For a great street setup, an OM-10 with auto exposure and a 28/35. can't be beat. If you drop it, lose it, or it gets stolen you won't be out a whole lot of $$$ (but you will cry over the lost shots still inside)
    - Bill Lynch

  10. #20
    MattKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Delta, British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    12,800
    Images
    60
    The combination of a 35mm (f/2.0 in my case) and a 24mm (f/2.8 in my case) is wonderfully flexible - although I add an 85mm f/2.0 for completeness.
    Matt

    “Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”

    Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin