Anyone has experience with them? Or if someone can point me in the right direction? I can't seems to find much information about them.
How do they compare to the Zuiko 24/2.8 and 28/2.8?
Or should I just forget about them and just go for the Nikkor AIS 28/2.8? As you guys probably knew I am looking for a lens in the 24-28mm region. I expect the lenses to perform at least in the league of EF 24/2.8 and 28/2.8. I'd prefer not to spend on the Zeiss territory, but if I have to, I guess I have to.
IQ is probably the most important aspect, though tiny lenses like the Zuiko and the Tamron do have their charm on me. Any advice will be much appreciated.
The 24 f/2.5 Tamron was a decent performer on film. It used an Adaptal mount system. I the lens, the adapting system wasn't the greatest. The 28 f/2.5 was rather forgettable on film.
I have no experience with Zuiko lenses. I don't think either of the Nikon lenses you mentioned will get you stellar image quality. The king is the 24-70 f/2.8, but it's also $2,000 or so.
I'm quite fond of the adaptall series lenses and own and use several on multiple mounts. I've had excellent luck with the Adaptall mounts and use them in Contax/Yashica, Nikon AI and Pentax KA forms.
The 28/2.5 is competent but not noteworthy. You can get better 28's for the same money. The 24 is reportedly better, but not world-class. I would not recommend either for digital use unless other options were unavailable. That said the 28 is likely as good as the EF 28/2.8 but the 24 is probably not as good as the EF 24/2.8 (which is distinctly better than the 28 IMHO)
The Nikkor 28/2.8 AI-S is quite good (and frankly at least as good as the Nikkor 24-70 that Carl references). Th
I'd recommend looking strongly at the Zuiko 28/3.5 or 24/2.8 or the Nikkor 28/2.8 AI-S (and only the AI-S, the other versions are not nearly as good).
I would highly recommend the Tamron 24mm f2.5 - it is comparable to the OM 24mm f2.8. The tamron has very nice colors and is only slightly larger than the OM 24mm. For the price, it is hard to beat.
The Tamron 28mm does not come close to the performance of the OM 28mm f2.8 - I do not have the OM 28mm f3.5 for comparison as I already had the OM 28mm f2.8. I would skip the Tamron 28mm in favor of the OM lenses.
Another very nice 28mm is the Minolta Rokkor 28mm f2.5 SI --> have not seen many of these around. Jim (Fellow FM member) had one of these converted for me from Rokkor to EF mount and I must say it is exceptional. Unlike the Rokkor 58mm f1.2, the converted Rokkor 28mm SI does not have an interference issue with the Canon full frame or crop sensor SLR's. I prefer it over the OM 28mm f2.8.
I'm glad that there isn't any kind words for the Tamron 28/2.5m made my choice eaiser.
From the online samples, the Nikon AIS does look good. Or at least one need to spend a lot more to get better corner performance at larger aperture (which I will be using mostly, but of course I wouldn't refuse a stellar landscape lens). How does the Zuiko 28/2.8 compares to the AIS? The Nikon AI 28/2 (I'd assume it is practically the same as the AIS version) is also an option for me. I guess I don't mind a big 28 if I had a small 24 (it's more for my E-P1).
On the 24 mm side, is there any others that I should be looking at?
I'd like to add that the Sigma 24 f/1.8 and Zuiko 28 f/2 are both excellent lenses, better than I'd hoped and are very good wide open. The Sigma 28 f/1.8 is supposed to be great too. I'd give these a look too.
I have the Sigma 20/1.8, and I thought it's a great lens. Had tried the 28/1.8 briefly, it seems to be easily on par with the Canon 35/2, but I picked the Canon as I thought the built was somewhat cheesy (the 20/1.8 is different as it is internal focus) and huge. I guess I'd revisit that if I need a 28 for my Canon. I mounted the 20/1.8 on my E-P1 and I thought it looks pretty amusing.
If the EF 28/2.8 is a pretty lackluster lens, I guess the the Sigma 28/1.8 is a better benchmark.
For the 24 I need it to be small enough as not to look too ridiculous on the E-P1. So far the Zuiko and the Tamron are probably the smallest. But I don't mind going for a more "normal" sized 24mm.
Navyblue wrote:
I have the Sigma 20/1.8, and I thought it's a great lens. Had tried the 28/1.8 briefly, it seems to be easily on par with the Canon 35/2, but I picked the Canon as I thought the built was somewhat cheesy (the 20/1.8 is different as it is internal focus) and huge. I guess I'd revisit that if I need a 28 for my Canon. I mounted the 20/1.8 on my E-P1 and I thought it looks pretty amusing.
If the EF 28/2.8 is a pretty lackluster lens, I guess the the Sigma 28/1.8 is a better benchmark.
For the 24 I need it to be small enough as not to look too ridiculous on the E-P1. So far the Zuiko and the Tamron are probably the smallest. But I don't mind going for a more "normal" sized 24mm. ...Show more →
For E-P1 user there's also the Zuiko Digital 25/2.8 (Decent, small, AF's) and the Nikkor 24/2.8 is reasonably compact, I've used my AF version on the G1 quite successfully.
The Oly 25 pancake is actually the first lens that I considered, from the review it looks like it's a pretty nice lens (except for some CA, but not a big issue I guess). I even considered the E-620 instead of the E-P1 because of it.
But it needs the electronically coupled 4/3 adapter, which cost almost as much as the lens itself, which kinda puts me off (especially after I got the EOS to micro 4/3 adapter). Still it is the slimmest option, save for the micro 4/3 pancakes. but nevertheless it is a viable option, thanks for bringing it up
So for the 24, I guess there are the Zuiko, Nikkor and the Tamron. I gotta hunt around for the former 2. Any comparison between the Nikkor and the Zuiko?
For the 28, it seems to be more promising, I have the AIS 28/2.8, AI 28/2, OM 28/2.8, and the Sigma if I want to go AF. Which these is my best bet?
Navyblue wrote:
I have the Sigma 20/1.8, and I thought it's a great lens. Had tried the 28/1.8 briefly, it seems to be easily on par with the Canon 35/2, but I picked the Canon as I thought the built was somewhat cheesy (the 20/1.8 is different as it is internal focus) and huge. I guess I'd revisit that if I need a 28 for my Canon. I mounted the 20/1.8 on my E-P1 and I thought it looks pretty amusing.
If the EF 28/2.8 is a pretty lackluster lens, I guess the the Sigma 28/1.8 is a better benchmark.
For the 24 I need it to be small enough as not to look too ridiculous on the E-P1. So far the Zuiko and the Tamron are probably the smallest. But I don't mind going for a more "normal" sized 24mm. ...Show more →
The Zuiko 28 f/2 is small, although not as small as it's slower brother, it looks like it was made for the EP-1.
Navyblue wrote:
Yup. I happened to have an offer on the OM 28/2.8, and I guess it can't be worse than the 28/3.5?
Not from what I've heard, but I've not shot either.
Navyblue wrote:
The Oly 25 pancake is actually the first lens that I considered, from the review it looks like it's a pretty nice lens (except for some CA, but not a big issue I guess). I even considered the E-620 instead of the E-P1 because of it.
But it needs the electronically coupled 4/3 adapter, which cost almost as much as the lens itself, which kinda puts me off (especially after I got the EOS to micro 4/3 adapter). Still it is the slimmest option, save for the micro 4/3 pancakes. but nevertheless it is a viable option, thanks for bringing it up
So for the 24, I guess there are the Zuiko, Nikkor and the Tamron. I gotta hunt around for the former 2. Any comparison between the Nikkor and the Zuiko?
For the 28, it seems to be more promising, I have the AIS 28/2.8, AI 28/2, OM 28/2.8, and the Sigma if I want to go AF. Which these is my best bet?
1. The Panasonic DMW-MA1 is much cheaper than the Oly MMF-1 and functionally identical.
2. The MA1 and a dumb 4/3rds adapter is generally the cheapest and most flexible option for adapting most SLR mounts to m43. While dumb 4/3rds->m43 adapters do exist IMHO the $40 of cost savings between them and the MA1 ($139 at B&H) just doesn't make sense. With the exception of FD and EF adapters, direct SLR mount to m43 adapters typically cost more than the MA1/4/3rds adapter combo.
As to the Nikkor vs Zuiko 24's, the Zuiko's major advantages IMHO are not seen on 4/3rds since the biggest advantage is edge performance.
I have a deal on the AI 24/2.8 pending. I wish I have the OM which is slimmer and lighter, but the Nikon has CRC. Bjorn rate it pretty good, Photozone is not too enthusiastic about the AF version's (which seems to be of the same optically with the AI) corner performance on APS-C, CA and distortion.
