lordarka wrote: ! What I really want to see is Canon release a strong 20mm lens in the next few months that compares favorably to the Zeiss and Oly. I'd love the see the faces on those who paid over $4000 for a 21mm f/2.8 Distagon when that happens...
haha, i agree. i got a great price on my 21 and will survive if the market tanks.
however, as david and i were discussing tonight, it's much more likely for canon to fix their glass issue at the sensor than at the lens. their glass works great on film so why try to reinvent the wheel?
we now return you to your regularly-scheduled program.
I could kick myself-I had a beautiful OM 40 set including original case,4 lenses,original flash etc. like new. Couldn't give the stuff away, as Olympus has no spare parts for OM camera's or lenses any more. I gave it to my brother-in-law. Now it turns out I gave him 7500$ worth of camera!!!
Best sorce for all your Zuiko needsFactory Trained Olympus OM Service since 1977 http://www.zuiko.com/ CAMTECH PHOTO SERVICES INDEX
Heads up
Your Welcome
Daniel
Edited by Daniel Danrich on Jun 15, 2005 at 11:48 PM GMT
Folks, just because someone posted a review, doesn't mean it's the next big thing and there will be a boom in the market...I can't believe I'm the voice of reason here. I don't want to be the wet blanket, but I don't see anything here that leads me to sell the rights to my future children or mortgage my organs...
glowrider wrote:
Canon has had how many years to put together a stellar sub 35mm prime lens? I didn't pay 4 grand for my copy, and it's paid for itself already, but no need for schadenfreude, even in jest
! It's only partly in jest. The Canon forum has become a far less interesting resource for me because I fail to identify with the third-party lens mania that has swept the boards of late. I'm glad it works for everyone else, but the lens tests posted thus far have really done nothing for me. Having been briefly swept up by it, I acquired one of those lenses at the $1500 price tag, and returned it because I was not impressed... now I see them on sale for $4000! There's some Selbstbeschädigung for ya!
Schadenfreude - a most un-politique joy at a colleague’s misfortune.
Arka-
Seems like you lost out on over 2000$...
Please don't think I'm attacking you, but I do feel a need to stand up for those of us who decide to use different lenses. Sure, they can be absurdly expensive, but I don't think people are spending money they can ill-afford to lose to get them. Also, there are plenty of people who have acquired these lenses at not-so-absurd prices. So, to each his own, right?
Also, while tons of people seem to be buying into these things, the people really experiencing the added benefits are those of use using full frame cameras which are really tearing apart Canon's wide angle offerings.
And another thing, there are several third party offerings that are cheaper and superior (and oftentimes built to higher standards, and are more compact) than Canon's offerings.
Examples:
Canon 50 1.4 and 50 1.8 vs. Zeiss 50 1.4 and 50 1.7
Canon 24-70 vs. Zeiss 35-70
the Trailer Park 28...even the hollywood 28 is less expensive than the 35 1.4 which is a fantastic lens, if you can find one in stock...
Zeiss offerings allow a lot of people who can't afford "L" lenses or otherwise to enjoy high quality optics.
Of course these Zuiko prices are not surprising. There are adapters available to use OM mount lenses digitally now and the 21 f2.0 must be a very rare lens. When it was new its price was well within Leitz and Zeiss territory so only a very limited number were sold. If one compares the prices of more common lenses like the 35 mm shift (about 300$ max) or any "common lens" like the 75-150 or 1.4 50 etc. (well below 100$ or in case of the 1.8-50 about 10$) things start to look a bit more normal.
Prices. The FM market for CZ C/Y glass reached "irrational exuberance" a while ago, and is due for a correction: look at the crash in the VS35-70. These spikes happen in the real world, too. For example, I'm gnashing my teeth at the price of the Leica Summicron-M 35 Version 1, a chrome beauty that now hits $2.5K, or twice the level of last year. For Canon, we have the EF 200/1.8.
Performance. Standard primes were good enough in the '50s, when single-coating solved the glare problem, and allowed designs with more elements. The Zeiss Planar (and copycats) became king. You can buy one for $10, and enjoy it just fine on a Canon DSLR. Longer and wider primes cost just a bit more, and can deliver images beyond the resolution of the sensor.
Construction. The manual-focus helical feels great, has fine control, never needs re-chipping to work, provides usable focus and DOF scales, and can be CLA'ed by any repairman forever. The older lenses from the '60s have massive construction, and metal-knurled control rings. Name of the game is "Fun"!
Just a little tale from Down Under.
The last 24 hours have been rather hectic!
Watching the 24 Oly shift going crazy on Ebay, I still got it at the end, however the test
between the Canon and the Oly , I'm not convinced , however in the looks department the Oly is the winner!
That surely will impress the clients!
Also on Ebay I got myself a 35 Oly shift stamped by Sinaron Digital.
And yes I was ready to spend on the 21/2 Oly that end up going over $1400 US.
I thought paying $2900 US for the 24 was bad enough, but it is a mint out of the box copy!
Now here comes the fun part, for the sake of it, I dropped in the local pawnshop and asked the guy, if he had any Olympus lenses.
Just have a look in the corner over there he said.
And guess what ,a 21/2 Oly in a mint condition.
I said how much for this little lens?
How does $500 AUD sound, he answered!
Yes after all it was my lucky day!
Saved myself $1100 AUD
Put that towards the 24Oly ,I got myself 2 mint lenses, for a pretty good price.
Let the fun begin.
WR.
I just phoned up one of the largest retailers of used camera equipment in the UK, who had several Zuiko 21/3.5s listed on their web site, but they'd all already been sold. I did manage to find another retailer that had some and I just couldn't hold out any longer, so I now have a mint condition Zuiko 21/3.5 and 24/2.8 heading my way in the post The adapter may well take a little longer to get hold of, though.
For me, it's just that I'm not too happy with my current wide options, which are the 17-40/4 and 24-70/2.8. I'm pretty confident the Zuiko 21/3.5 will be better than the 17-40 at 21mm, and I'm hopeful the 24/2.8 will be better than the 24-70 at 24mm, because that's definitely where my copy is weakest. I really just jumped in and bought them now because I was worried someone else will try to profiteer and snap up the ones that are sitting there in used retailers at the moment. I've tried the Canon 28/2.8 and 35/2 primes in the past and wasn't impressed with them compared to the zooms.
Jun 16, 2005 at 06:48 AM
Lars Johnsson Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
Bob Bell wrote:
you really shouldnt talk about that stuff here, in 2 weeks everythign will double and be sold. then were are you going to find those deals?
Are you folks looking at the same tests I'm looking at? I don't see 1700$ worth of improvement from this lens over Canon's own offering. Other lenses, certainly. But just because there has been a little buzz over Zuiko the past couple of weeks, doesn't mean it's time to harvest your organs to get these lenses.
! What I really want to see is Canon release a strong 20mm lens in the next few months that compares favorably to the Zeiss and Oly. I'd love the see the faces on those who paid over $4000 for a 21mm f/2.8 Distagon when that happens...
