View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
DigiChromeEd
Joined: 29 Dec 2009 Posts: 3461 Location: Northern Ireland
|
Posted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 2:31 pm Post subject: Olympus OM 28mm |
|
|
DigiChromeEd wrote:
Apart from the speed do the Olympus OM 28mm f2.8 and 3.5 perform the same? _________________ "I've got a Nikon camera, I like to take a photograph" - Paul Simon |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Slalom
Joined: 10 Dec 2017 Posts: 151 Location: Stourbridge
|
Posted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 3:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Slalom wrote:
Here is the information for them:
http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/olympusom1n2/shared/zuiko/htmls/28mm1.htm
Looked my OM28 up and to my Surprise it is an F2.0, so i can not add anything to he above.
My 24 is a 2.8 and my 21 is a 3.5, So I guess I only got the 2.0 because it was 103UKP! the other two cost more! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
D1N0
Joined: 07 Aug 2012 Posts: 2483
|
Posted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 3:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
D1N0 wrote:
I doubt it, They have a distinctly different optical design:
2.8
3.5
source: http://allphotolenses.com _________________ pentaxian |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DigiChromeEd
Joined: 29 Dec 2009 Posts: 3461 Location: Northern Ireland
|
Posted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 3:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
DigiChromeEd wrote:
D1N0 wrote: |
I doubt it, They have a distinctly different optical design: |
In that case, which performs better for landscape use on FF? _________________ "I've got a Nikon camera, I like to take a photograph" - Paul Simon |
|
Back to top |
|
|
D1N0
Joined: 07 Aug 2012 Posts: 2483
|
Posted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 4:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
D1N0 wrote:
I don't know for Olympus but for Pentax the 3.5 models are the better performers. According to this review it doesn't matter http://slrlensreview.com/web/reviews/olympus/olympus-wide-angle/388-olympus-om-zuiko-28mm-f35-lens-review _________________ pentaxian |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DigiChromeEd
Joined: 29 Dec 2009 Posts: 3461 Location: Northern Ireland
|
Posted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 5:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
DigiChromeEd wrote:
D1N0 wrote: |
I don't know for Olympus but for Pentax the 3.5 models are the better performers. According to this review it doesn't matter http://slrlensrev iew.com/web/reviews/olympus/olympus-wide-angle/388-olympus-om-zuiko-28mm-f35-lens-review |
_________________ "I've got a Nikon camera, I like to take a photograph" - Paul Simon |
|
Back to top |
|
|
martinsmith99
Joined: 31 Aug 2008 Posts: 6943 Location: S Glos, UK
Expire: 2013-11-18
|
Posted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 7:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
martinsmith99 wrote:
The Oly 28/2.8 was one of the 1st 2 lenses that I bought when I 1st discovered that older lense could be used on a modern DSLR.
The 2.8 is an ok lens and one of only a few that I've ever sold. The 3.5 is probably the better lens. _________________ Casual attendance these days |
|
Back to top |
|
|
kansalliskalaCafe
Joined: 23 Jul 2015 Posts: 602 Location: South Finland, countryside
|
Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2018 6:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
kansalliskalaCafe wrote:
that is a strange flat glass on 3.5, first I tried to remove it when I thought it was some sort of filter _________________ (my normal account password still on another computer) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
MMouse
Joined: 18 Apr 2018 Posts: 58
|
Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2018 7:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
MMouse wrote:
The f/3,5 version has more glass. I heard that the f/2,8 version performs quite similarly from f/3,5 and above. If it's right, I may try.
I only have the f/3,5 and it is an excellent lens. Sharp from edge to edge even wide open on 24mpx full frame. I find it more reliable than the 24mm f/2,8 I also own. Quite surprising for the price !
Don't believe the famous Pentax K 28mm f/3,5 can be significantly sharper, it may have different colors and probably better micro contrast, but the OM is unbeatable for the money. If the f/3,5 was f/2,8, it would be one of my favorite lenses. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DigiChromeEd
Joined: 29 Dec 2009 Posts: 3461 Location: Northern Ireland
|
Posted: Mon Oct 22, 2018 3:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
DigiChromeEd wrote:
MMouse wrote: |
The f/3,5 version has more glass. I heard that the f/2,8 version performs quite similarly from f/3,5 and above. If it's right, I may try.
I only have the f/3,5 and it is an excellent lens. Sharp from edge to edge even wide open on 24mpx full frame. I find it more reliable than the 24mm f/2,8 I also own. Quite surprising for the price !
Don't believe the famous Pentax K 28mm f/3,5 can be significantly sharper, it may have different colors and probably better micro contrast, but the OM is unbeatable for the money. If the f/3,5 was f/2,8, it would be one of my favorite lenses. |
See here:- http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic,p,1518029.html#1518029 _________________ "I've got a Nikon camera, I like to take a photograph" - Paul Simon |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|