Olympus OM wides? (24s and 28s)

[GarageBoy]

I'm trying to put together an inexpensive kit to keep in my bag and unfortunately, the Nikon 24s and 28s are a tad too rich for my blood (and I own an F3P and an FA)

So, how are the Olympus wides and how do they compare with the Nikons? (should I just save up for the 28 2.8 AIS ?)

[dynachrome]

The 28/3.5 AI is an excellent lens. It doesn't have the CRC feature of the 28/2.8 AIS. What you save by getting the 28/3.5 AI will leave you enough to get a 55/3.5 Macro and then some. The CRC feature is nice and I have it on other 28s like the 28/1.8 Konica UC Hexanon and the 28/2 Canon FD SSC. In the close range any of the 55/3.5 Micro Nikkors will be better than these 28mm lenses with CRC.

[E. von Hoegh]

I had the older single-coated OM 24/2.8. It was pretty good, the main problem was I didn't know how to use extreme wides.

[Ulrich Drolshagen]

I had the older single-coated OM 24/2.8. It was pretty good, the main problem was I didn't know how to use extreme wides.

+1. Me too not knowing how to use it properly.

[hdeyong]

I have the 24, f2.8, the 50, f1.8 and the 100, f2.8, and I love all of them. Excellent optical quality, light and compact, and even all use the same 49mm filters.

[RidingWaves]

Yeah, don't knock those "lesser" Nikkors, the 3.5 is pretty good especially in B&W. I believe there was an optical change about the switch to Ais offering closer focus but they are all pretty good, and can be found with little effort for little money. The couple of 28mm Ai 2.8 non-CRC I've had were decent, great color and actually pretty good bokeh, but compared to the couple of 28mm f/2 I have they were not AS good. Good, not GREAT, which the f/2 is, and since I've got way too many 28's they had to go, sold one to my friend in MINT condition for 99.00 and he was very happy as was I. So, don't rule out the Nikkor especially since you have two good bodies.

[Chris Nielsen]

All I know about the 28 2.8 Zuiko is that I really love mine, the first roll of film I got back blew me away. Testing my new 24 2.8 now, hope it does the same!

[darinwc]

What you gain in cost of the lens you will loose in cost of another body (and more lenses for it).

-The Nikkor AIS 28mm f2.8 has a bit of a cult status because of its CRC and excellent reviews. But even then, I have seen it for relatively decent prices if you look hard enough.
As an alternative, the Nikkor 24mm f2.8, AI 28mm f2.8, or 28mm f3.5 go for much less, and are excellent lenses just without the CRC.

The Olympus OM lenses you reference do not have CRC either, so why not just stick to your one system?

And lastly, other highly recommended lenses are the Kiron (aka Vivitar serial numbers 22*) 28mm and Sigma 28mm lenses. The sigma is a real bargain.

[E. von Hoegh]

The only reason to go with lenses having CRC - Close Range Correction - is if you make wide-angle closeups, about the last thing I'd choose a WA lens for.

[GarageBoy]

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?