| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
cgustav
Joined: 01 Jun 2014
Posts: 270
Location: Los Angeles
|
 Posted: Thu Dec 31, 2015 3:47 am Post subject: Olympus 24 2.8 |
 |
|
cgustav wrote:
Since I'm loving Olympus lenses I'm now interested in a 24mm.
How does the 24 f/2.8 perform?
Main use: Street Photography (mainly walking sessions) @ f/8 or f/11, possibly some architecture. Video too.
Camera: A6000 (FF in the future, still waiting for a good A7sxxx). |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
listera
Joined: 24 Oct 2013
Posts: 126
Location: Ankara
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 31, 2015 11:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
listera wrote:
Quite good. Especially @ f/8 or f/11, it may be the sharpest affordable legacy 24mm. Even in m43 its hi-resolution power can be observed. More than that it is also very tiny. You can consider grabbing a MC version as earlier coatings of Zuikos are a bit flare friendly and some say that there is considerable variation among copies, thus try to find one that you can return.
_________________
Zuikoware / Rokkorprone / FDthropist
https://www.flickr.com/photos/97103793@N06/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WNG555
Joined: 18 Dec 2014
Posts: 784
Location: Arrid-Zone-A, USA
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 31, 2015 11:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
WNG555 wrote:
It's excellent. My copy is a good one, so I was fortunate. Some can be de-centered.
Its sharp range is f/5.6-f/8. It starts to suffer defraction at f/16.
_________________
"The eyes are useless when the mind is blind."
Sony ILCE-6000, SELP1650, SEL1855, SEL55210, SEL5018. Sigma 19/30/60mm f2.8 EX DN Art.
Rokinon 8mm f3.5 Fish-Eye, 14mm f2.8 IF ED UMC. Samyang 12mm f2.8 ED AS NCS Fish-Eye.
And a bunch of Manual-Focus Lenses
My Flickr |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cgustav
Joined: 01 Jun 2014
Posts: 270
Location: Los Angeles
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 02, 2016 6:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
cgustav wrote:
Thank you guys for your replies.
I also did some research, and everywhere the result is pretty much confirming your experience.
Actually some comparison with the Nikon 24 2.8 seems to put the two lenses quite at the same level.
Now, for what concerns the MC version and the flare issue, I'm having a hard time finding a MC in a price range of $100-$130, perhaps the MC is just more expensive. I'm wondering how bad is the flaring issue on the SC version since I can find the SC in that price range (perhaps even a little less). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WNG555
Joined: 18 Dec 2014
Posts: 784
Location: Arrid-Zone-A, USA
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 02, 2016 11:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
WNG555 wrote:
Digging mine out, I didn't recall if I had a SC or MC version. There is no MC label on the face of mine, and it has a silver-nose. I will assume it's a SC model.
I can only say from my experience with this one and a hood, I don't have issues with flaring.
_________________
"The eyes are useless when the mind is blind."
Sony ILCE-6000, SELP1650, SEL1855, SEL55210, SEL5018. Sigma 19/30/60mm f2.8 EX DN Art.
Rokinon 8mm f3.5 Fish-Eye, 14mm f2.8 IF ED UMC. Samyang 12mm f2.8 ED AS NCS Fish-Eye.
And a bunch of Manual-Focus Lenses
My Flickr |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hoanpham
Joined: 31 Jan 2011
Posts: 2575
Expire: 2015-01-18
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 02, 2016 12:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
hoanpham wrote:
It is one of the best 24mm I have used. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gardener
Joined: 22 Sep 2013
Posts: 950
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 02, 2016 6:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Gardener wrote:
| cgustav wrote: |
| I'm having a hard time finding a MC in a price range of $100-$130, perhaps the MC is just more expensive. I'm wondering how bad is the flaring issue on the SC version since I can find the SC in that price range (perhaps even a little less). |
My records (I keep track of these things) show that I sold one of my two copies for $190 a while back, but prices may have drifted lower since then. FWIW, I have not noticed much difference between the two versions, but then again I was not looking for flares. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kuuan
Joined: 14 Jan 2008
Posts: 4569
Location: right now: Austria
Expire: 2014-12-26
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 03, 2016 10:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
kuuan wrote:
first, like a number of other Zuikos, it must be about the smallest SLR lens in it's focal length.
It is a great performer, no complaints specially with the MC version, and, for what it's worth, it's corner performance is impressive, e.g. on Sony A7
the pic:
100% crop of lower, left corner
_________________
my photos on flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/collections |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
barryreid
Joined: 27 Aug 2013
Posts: 285
Location: London
Expire: 2015-11-04
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2016 10:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
barryreid wrote:
IMO, it is a very good lens. It's got the best corners of the film era 24/2.8s I've used on the Sony A7r (Canon FD, Sigma Super-Wide II, Tokina RMC, Zeiss C/Y fit 25). I have read that the earliest and latest models are both to be avoided.
_________________
Canon + Contax + Minolta + Nikon + Olympus + Pentax + Yashica = Adaptall-2 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cgustav
Joined: 01 Jun 2014
Posts: 270
Location: Los Angeles
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
cgustav wrote:
Kuuan,
thanks for posting that sample!
barryreid,
thanks for the hint.
How can I find out if the model I'm looking at is early or late? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hoanpham
Joined: 31 Jan 2011
Posts: 2575
Expire: 2015-01-18
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2016 9:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
hoanpham wrote:
Zuiko OM 24mm f2.8 MC version
 IMG_1406 by H X, on Flickr
 IMG_1405 by H X, on Flickr
 IMG_1403 by H X, on Flickr
 IMG_1395 by H X, on Flickr
 IMG_1377 by H X, on Flickr
 IMG_1369 by H X, on Flickr |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
barryreid
Joined: 27 Aug 2013
Posts: 285
Location: London
Expire: 2015-11-04
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2016 5:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
barryreid wrote:
| cgustav wrote: |
Kuuan,
thanks for posting that sample!
barryreid,
thanks for the hint.
How can I find out if the model I'm looking at is early or late? |
For the early models it's well known and is to do with the coating. Rule of thumb is that if it has a silver nose it's probably single coated. Unfortunately, I can't find a reference for the issue with late models any more, however I think it was to do with a baffle change which caused vignetting, or something.
_________________
Canon + Contax + Minolta + Nikon + Olympus + Pentax + Yashica = Adaptall-2 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dan_
Joined: 05 Dec 2012
Posts: 1058
Location: Romania
Expire: 2016-12-19
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2016 6:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
dan_ wrote:
I have an Olympus 24mm as well and I like it very much.
AFAIK, if you want the best then the version to avoid is the H-Zuiko Auto-W 24mm f2.8 - the single coated version.
The other 2 versions are multi coated.
But the H-Zuiko Auto-W 24mm is no lemon - just a bit more prone to flare. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
glaebhoerl
Joined: 03 May 2014
Posts: 100
Location: Hungary
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2016 9:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
glaebhoerl wrote:
Right, that's the general pattern on all of their OM lenses from what I've read. "OM-SYSTEM ?.ZUIKO AUTO-?" is single-coated, "OM-SYSTEM ZUIKO MC AUTO-?" is multicoated (obviously), and plain "OM-SYSTEM ZUIKO AUTO-?" is allegedly a newer and even better "NMC" coating. But in any case the rule of thumb is that it's single-coated if and only if there's a letter before the "ZUIKO".
_________________
use: 40/1.4 Zuiko; 50/1.4 Takumar; 85/2 Rokkor; 105/2.5 Nikkor; 200/5 Zuiko.
have: Lens Turbo II; 20/2.8 Flektogon; "25/1.4 APS-C"; 28/2.8 Industar; 35/1.8 Rokkor; 35-70/3.5 Rokkor; 50/1.4 Prakticar; 50/1.7 Zenitar-M; 50/1.8 Pancolar; 50/2 Jupiter; 55/2.8 Industar; 57/1.4 Hexanon; 58/1.8 RE.Auto-Topcor; 58/2 Helios; 100/2.8 Zuiko; 135/2.8 Pentacon, Yashica ML; 135/3.5 Pentax-M, Rokkor, Fujinon; 180/5.6 Sigma; 200/5.6 Tele-Takumar.
want: 12/2 Samyang; 20/4 Pentax-M; 24/2.8 Zuiko; 28/3.5 Pentax; 35/2.4 Prakticar; 35/3.5 Takumar; 50/1.5 Sonnar; 58/2 Small Biotar; 75/1.8 Fujinon-TV; 100/3.5 Canon (LTM); 135/2.5 Takumar; 135/3.5 Prakticar.
in my dreams: 80/1.8 Prakticar; 90/2.8 Tele-Elmarit-M; 180/4 APO-Lanthar; 250/5.6 Rokkor.
reviews flickr |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cgustav
Joined: 01 Jun 2014
Posts: 270
Location: Los Angeles
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 07, 2016 7:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
cgustav wrote:
thanks for the nice samples hoanpham!
barryreid, dan, glaebhoerl
thanks for the info, it makes more sense now.
So it seems I had the chance to buy a newer copy for a very good price, now is gone, I guess I hesitated too much.
The average price now is $150-$200, which I guess is not bad, but I'm not in a rush and I'll wait in case a better deal shows up.
Thank you all for your help. |
|
| 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
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
