Thanks David, awesome video. BTW I have the 3.5 version and it is paired with an Olympus E-M1. I use this setup for B&W street photography and it they really go well together. Thank you.
I traded my f2.8 for the f2. The 2.8 just felt like it had less character and I liked the idea of an extra stop of light. Even more than that I think the character of the f2 is more pleasing to me. You really can’t go wrong with any of the Olympus lenses from this era though! Thanks for another great video!
Excellent video. I appreciated the scoring examples and chart. I particularly like the flaring of the 3.5 and barrel distortion is a major gripe so it’s importance weighed heavily on my choices. Thank you
Yay, the 28mm showdown I've personaly been waiting for! I'm routing for Zuiko 28mm f/2, since it's the only one of these I have, but it's definitely not a perfect lens, so I expect f/2.8 to be a bit better.
Can someone explain his recommendations at the end? Why is optimal aberrations and sharpness best for M43, Why is flare, ghosting and light roll off performance better for Full Frame?
Enlargement ratio. So the conclusion has to do with someone looking for one of these three lenses specifically and picking a lens based on their format. If a photo from a full frame, APS-C, and M43 camera were to be enlarged to 8X10 or A4 size, then the FF image would need to have a lower enlargement ratio than would the smaller sensors. The smaller the sensor, the better the lens needs to be in terms of optical performance because enlarging the image to the same print or viewing size as a larger-sensor image requires more enlargement. That increased enlargement ratio increases the appearance of optical flaws in images. Smaller sensors need lenses with better optical performance to deliver equivalent photos at the same final image size as photos from cameras with larger image formats.
It's grown on me a bit. I tend to be attracted to 24mm, but the slightly lower amount of scene distortion in 28 is very nice. 28mm on half frame is pretty close to an ideal standard lens.
That's either flare, a hot spot, or a ghost, and it's not possible to say which without seeing it. They all have different causes and preventions. A diffuse bright spot with the aperture open is likely flare. Same but with the aperture closed is probably a hot spot. If the shape is colored and has the shape of the aperture, it's a ghost.
How would I go about showing large prints to an audience that's something like 60% mobile phone viewers and 37% desktop? I don't know if a technical solution to that which makes large images work. However, for those interested, there's also a link in the video description to the full-res images used in this video.
![[DRIP] ‘Woke Up In Tokyo (RUKA & ASA)’ PREVIEW](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/QN44lcR_VkI/mqdefault.jpg)
Thanks David, awesome video. BTW I have the 3.5 version and it is paired with an Olympus E-M1. I use this setup for B&W street photography and it they really go well together. Thank you.
Thank you!
I traded my f2.8 for the f2. The 2.8 just felt like it had less character and I liked the idea of an extra stop of light. Even more than that I think the character of the f2 is more pleasing to me. You really can’t go wrong with any of the Olympus lenses from this era though! Thanks for another great video!
Thank you! It's definitely fair to say that the 2.8 has less character. 😃
Excellent video. I appreciated the scoring examples and chart. I particularly like the flaring of the 3.5 and barrel distortion is a major gripe so it’s importance weighed heavily on my choices. Thank you
Thank you!
Yay, the 28mm showdown I've personaly been waiting for! I'm routing for Zuiko 28mm f/2, since it's the only one of these I have, but it's definitely not a perfect lens, so I expect f/2.8 to be a bit better.
And I can confirm that Zuiko 28mm f/2 has a floating group, and when it malfunctioned, it was reeeealy noticable.
This was an interesting one to make. I'm definitely looking forward to the next.
I have the f/2 and the f/2.8 and I enjoy them both on my film OM bodies. :-) Thanks for the analysis!
Thank you!
Very useful David. Thanks!
Thank you!
@1:10, the AoV cell for the 2.8 says "AoV" instead of a number. Was that not available online or not measurable?
Dang it. That was a typo because I make these late at night after work. The AoV on all is stated as the same.
Can someone explain his recommendations at the end?
Why is optimal aberrations and sharpness best for M43, Why is flare, ghosting and light roll off performance better for Full Frame?
Enlargement ratio. So the conclusion has to do with someone looking for one of these three lenses specifically and picking a lens based on their format. If a photo from a full frame, APS-C, and M43 camera were to be enlarged to 8X10 or A4 size, then the FF image would need to have a lower enlargement ratio than would the smaller sensors. The smaller the sensor, the better the lens needs to be in terms of optical performance because enlarging the image to the same print or viewing size as a larger-sensor image requires more enlargement. That increased enlargement ratio increases the appearance of optical flaws in images. Smaller sensors need lenses with better optical performance to deliver equivalent photos at the same final image size as photos from cameras with larger image formats.
28mm is so intresting focal length. Definitely a favourite. On the pen F the 20mm 3.5 is the 28 but stil amzing focal length for vertical photos
It's grown on me a bit. I tend to be attracted to 24mm, but the slightly lower amount of scene distortion in 28 is very nice. 28mm on half frame is pretty close to an ideal standard lens.
Would be interesting a comparison between the om 28mm f2 and Pentax m 28mm f2. Since the Pentax should be considered the successor
If I get my hands on the Pentax, that would be a fun video.
Good
I have a lens that gives me a soft haze in the middle whenever I shoot with the sky in the back, is there a name for it?, and its only the sky.
That's either flare, a hot spot, or a ghost, and it's not possible to say which without seeing it. They all have different causes and preventions.
A diffuse bright spot with the aperture open is likely flare. Same but with the aperture closed is probably a hot spot. If the shape is colored and has the shape of the aperture, it's a ghost.
@@DavidHancock maybe a hot spot, it just looks washed out in the middle of the photo contains the sky.
tyvm for the video! I own the f/2 so I am obviously a fan of spherical/chromatic/pedantic abomination and I'm getting what I payed for. Or not?
Probably are. 😃 Honestly, I think that the f/2 has some serious potential for some uses, more so than the other two.
perhaps showing actual large prints might be more convincing - thanks for the video anyway
How would I go about showing large prints to an audience that's something like 60% mobile phone viewers and 37% desktop? I don't know if a technical solution to that which makes large images work. However, for those interested, there's also a link in the video description to the full-res images used in this video.