[quote name='Yakim' timestamp='1282946917' post='2263']
1. I just made a search. Zuiko lenses on Sony bodies will need an adapter with glass. Bye bye Zuiko. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />[/quote]
Fair enough, but the fact that you considered the 18/3.5 to begin with means that it's an acceptable focal-length/aperture combination, isn't it?
Very simple. If (1) you consider the 18/3.5 as offering acceptable focal-length/aperture combination, and (2) your original requested focal-length range was "17-25mm", then a 24/3.5 should be acceptable too, let alone a faster 24/2.8.
In addition, the Sony has several advantages over the Oly:
1. AF. The unique AF system is probably the best reason to get the A55. Do you want to give it all up when using a short lens?
2. AE in all PASM modes, and with multi-segment metering (I doubt non-dedicated lenses are supported with anything other than CW metering).
3. Shallower DOF. The DOF provided by 24/2.8 wide-open is slightly shallower than an 18mm lens would provide at f/1.7 (good luck finding such a lens!)
4. AS is more effective as the camera knows the lens focal-length. In fact, I doubt AS won't degrade the results if the camera doesn't know the focal-length. At least in some Olympus and Pentax cameras you can enter it manually, but I don't think it's possible in any Sony camera.
5. Correct aperture value is recorded in the EXIF
6. No need to attach cumbersome adapters
7. Costs around $200-$250 (vs. the currently insane price of the Olympus - 4 or 5 times more).
Oh, and if you're into 18/3.5, how about one that's [url="http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1272/cat/83"]"sharp wide open at 18mm"[/url], supports AF/AS/AE fully on the Sony and weighs only 210 gram? It's priced very nicely too :-)
1. I just made a search. Zuiko lenses on Sony bodies will need an adapter with glass. Bye bye Zuiko. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />[/quote]Fair enough, but the fact that you considered the 18/3.5 to begin with means that it's an acceptable focal-length/aperture combination, isn't it?
Quote:2. I don't get it. Why are you comparing lenses which are so different?
Very simple. If (1) you consider the 18/3.5 as offering acceptable focal-length/aperture combination, and (2) your original requested focal-length range was "17-25mm", then a 24/3.5 should be acceptable too, let alone a faster 24/2.8.
In addition, the Sony has several advantages over the Oly:
1. AF. The unique AF system is probably the best reason to get the A55. Do you want to give it all up when using a short lens?
2. AE in all PASM modes, and with multi-segment metering (I doubt non-dedicated lenses are supported with anything other than CW metering).
3. Shallower DOF. The DOF provided by 24/2.8 wide-open is slightly shallower than an 18mm lens would provide at f/1.7 (good luck finding such a lens!)
4. AS is more effective as the camera knows the lens focal-length. In fact, I doubt AS won't degrade the results if the camera doesn't know the focal-length. At least in some Olympus and Pentax cameras you can enter it manually, but I don't think it's possible in any Sony camera.
5. Correct aperture value is recorded in the EXIF
6. No need to attach cumbersome adapters
7. Costs around $200-$250 (vs. the currently insane price of the Olympus - 4 or 5 times more).
Oh, and if you're into 18/3.5, how about one that's [url="http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1272/cat/83"]"sharp wide open at 18mm"[/url], supports AF/AS/AE fully on the Sony and weighs only 210 gram? It's priced very nicely too :-)