Thanks, everyone, for the responses.
Not surprisingly, price aside, the 24 + 35 combination
wins (apart from portability and getting out really
wide at 20mm).
The issue of indoor available-light photography is a
serious one for me, as well as wishing to blur the
background a bit at times with faster apertures...so
this argues for the primes. But also, on the other
hand, there is still the question of whether 24 will
be wide enough indoors. And the range of 20 to 35
just seems a really useful one. So this would argue
for the zoom.
I am happy to know that, despite being a zoom, the
20-35 is indeed very well regarded. Though it is not
a $1500 2.8 lens, clearly it is aimed well above the
usual lowest-level consumer zoom category. In the
past I've been mainly a primes person but lately have
gotten a lot of use from the FA 28-105 f/4-5.6
powerzoom and have considered additional, better zooms
more seriously.
I am even more happy to learn that the 24mm is still a
good one and that the later negative reports were only
in regard to digital applications. That is a relief.
I should have mentioned I would be using these lenses
with film bodies, mainly the PZ-1p.
Honestly, I am still not decided, as the 20-35 just
seems a really neat and handy lens! Happily, I have
some time to decide.
Thanks, again, to Bruce, Paul, Joseph, and Mark.
Chaso
> Re: 20-35 -vs- 24 + 35
>
> I can offer a couple of comments that might be
> useful.
> My comments below apply to full-frame film
> applications.
>
> One one hand, if you need it there is no substitute
> for
> a larger aperture. If you do night-time indoor
> available light photography, the two additional
> stops
> can make a huge difference. Also, the 35mm can be
> shot
> at F2 to provide at least a some background blurring
> for certain subjects.
>
> On the other hand, 20mm is significantly wider than
> 24mm.
> I find that with outdoor landscapes 20mm may
> actually
> be too wide. In contrast, sometimes 24mm isn't wide
> enough for indoor stuff (architecture, people,
> etc.).
>
> I'm doing some work with fast lenses these days.
> In your place I would probably purchase the two
> primes
> or maybe a 20mm F2.8 and 35mm F2.0. For travel,
> there's
> no question that I would go with the 20-35mm zoom,
> however.
>
> --Mark
>
>
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
