On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 10:33:30 -0500 (CDT), [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >
<snip> > To be fair, I haven't heard that ANY manufacturer's 24-50 zoom was very > good except the 25-50 Nikkor, which is apparently quite large and heavy, > and a first generation, prove-we-can-do-it lens. Either 24-50 is hard to > do, even at f/4, or the intended market for the 24-50/4 zoom was pretty > undemanding in quality. I'm kinda surprised, because 24-50 (on film) > always seemed like it made a whole lot of sense and I'd have thought that > photojournalists would have been all over them as they subsequently > jumped on the 20-35 and 17-35s, if anybody had made a good one. <snip> The Vivitar S1 f3.8 24-48mm (first generation) is a pretty good lens. Very little if any distortion at 24mm. Doesn't flare too bad (but I tend not to point it toward the sun). It's my "walking around when I don't know what to bring" lens on my LX or MX. I know I trot this one out every time that I tout this lens, but all the straight lines show how linear it is (shot at 24mm): http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=1020389 It is rather big and heavy, however. cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson
