Ed Sawyer wrote:
The 21/3.5, while a fine lens and amazingly small, is definitely not at the level of the distagon. A fairer comparison would be the 21/2 OM which really is world class and holds its own vs. Distagon 21.
Definitely NOT my version of the 21/2 which I reported on at length here and finally sold on! Most seem to rate the 21/3.5 higher unless you REALLY need the wider aperture.
It\'s an FL I rarely use, but do need occasionally, so I\'m on the search again for a 21/3.5 this time. Also the A7 has my interest so this thread is helpful, thanks Rusty!
NB. The Novoflex is one of the few adapters that takes a rotatable tripod mount which is a big plus IMO, but they don\'t do one from EOS-EF to Alpha-E yet. (I\'m hoping.)
Ed Sawyer wrote:
The 21/3.5, while a fine lens and amazingly small, is definitely not at the level of the distagon. A fairer comparison would be the 21/2 OM which really is world class and holds its own vs. Distagon 21.
Definitely NOT my version of the 21/2 which I reported on at length here and finally sold on! Most seem to rate the 21/3.5 higher unless you REALLY need the wider aperture.
It\'s an FL I rarely use, but do need occasionally, so I\'m on the search again for a 21/3.5 this time. Also the A& has my interest so this thread is helpful, thanks Rusty!
NB. The Novoflex is one of the few adapters that takes a rotatable tripod mount which is a big plus IMO, but they don\'t do one from EOS-EF to Alpha-E yet. (I\'m hoping.)
Ed Sawyer wrote:
The 21/3.5, while a fine lens and amazingly small, is definitely not at the level of the distagon. A fairer comparison would be the 21/2 OM which really is world class and holds its own vs. Distagon 21.
Definitely NOT my version of the 21/2 which I reported on at length here and finally sold on! Most seem to rate the 21/3.5 higher unless you REALLY need the wider aperture.
It\'s an FL I rarely use, but do need occasionally, so I\'m on the search again for a 21/3.5 this time. Also the A& has my interest so this thread is helpful, thanks Rusty!
Ed Sawyer wrote:
The 21/3.5, while a fine lens and amazingly small, is definitely not at the level of the distagon. A fairer comparison would be the 21/2 OM which really is world class and holds its own vs. Distagon 21.
Definitely NOT my version of the 21/2 which I reported on at length here and finally sold on! Most seem to rate the 21/3.5 higher unless you REALLY need the wider aperture.
It\'s an FL I rarely use, but do need occasionally, so I\'m on the search again for a 21/3.5 this time.
Dec 04, 2013 at 03:32 PM
Previous versions of timballic's message #11978891 « Who's Got Olympus on Sony A7/A7R Images ??? »
