Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Olympus Lenses are Awesome  (Read 8463 times)
aragdog
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 37


« Reply #20 on: November 16, 2013, 10:43:05 AM »
ReplyReply

I will get in this one.  As a recent owner of an OM-1 and awaiting the 12-40 2.8 lens, all I can say is the thing takes photos.  Instead of lugging my 800E and a group of primaries and all this little camera is not breaking my back and taking just great photos.
Logged
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6034


When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.


WWW
« Reply #21 on: November 16, 2013, 12:02:01 PM »
ReplyReply

The camera/lens combo that I have (Canon), vs. the one I would like to have (actually, I would rather have 12-40/2.8 new Olympus, but the site did not have it for comparison):

http://j.mp/1ekIxvW
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
Telecaster
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 866



« Reply #22 on: November 16, 2013, 01:32:47 PM »
ReplyReply

The new Oly 12–40mm is a jewel of a lens IMO. It can hang with the Four-Thirds 50–200mm, no problem. Balances well in terms of both size & weight on the Oly E-M1 & E-M5 cameras. A little big on the Panasonic GX7 but fine weight-wise. You could easily carry around a camera/12–40 combo on a wrist strap all day long.

BTW, it focuses down to 20cm at all focal lengths, a bit closer even in manual focus mode.

-Dave-
Logged
fike
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1373


Hiker Photographer


WWW
« Reply #23 on: November 16, 2013, 02:16:16 PM »
ReplyReply

Yes, the close focus of the 12-40 is quite good.  I also love the pull-to-focus ring.  It seems sturdier than the panasonic 12-35 too. Another advantage over the Panasonic 12-35 is that the lens hood actually clips-on with a positive connection.  On more than a few occasions my 12-35 lens hood got twisted askew so that it showed in the corners of my images.  It is quite annoying.  It feels like a MFT version of the legendary Canon 24-70 f/2.8--Actually I think that really is the best comparison. 
Logged

Fike, Trailpixie, or Marc Shaffer
marcshaffer.net
TrailPixie.net

I carry an M43 ILC, a couple of good lenses, and a tripod.
AFairley
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1174



« Reply #24 on: November 16, 2013, 03:09:54 PM »
ReplyReply

The camera/lens combo that I have (Canon), vs. the one I would like to have (actually, I would rather have 12-40/2.8 new Olympus, but the site did not have it for comparison):

http://j.mp/1ekIxvW

Yeah, my D800 + 24-70 weighs about 4 pounds.  The E-M1 + 12-40 weighs about 2 pounds.  To equalize the weights, you would have to duct tape two cans of soda onto the E-M1's camera strap.   Cheesy
Logged

aragdog
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 37


« Reply #25 on: November 17, 2013, 10:12:32 AM »
ReplyReply

Duct tape, I did not think of that.
Logged
HSway
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 62



WWW
« Reply #26 on: November 18, 2013, 10:15:23 AM »
ReplyReply

Agree with the article, it’s more than just a great camera. With the EM-1 they have made the fundamental re-connection Olympus needed to make. Looking forward to seeing the shots from this fantastic kit.
Logged

bdosserman
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 120


« Reply #27 on: November 19, 2013, 09:55:46 AM »
ReplyReply

I for one remain unconvinced that Olympus (or Panasonic) will be able to compete with APS-C or FF rivals longer term (with a mirror or not)
Whilst I agree the sensors have improved (DR and low light), and there is a size appeal for some users. I can't see any hope of micro 4/3 making any significant impact on the pro market, none at all actually.

I certainly can't speak for the pro market, but my current setup is this: I have a D800 for landscape and macro, and GH2 for wildlife and casual walkaround (either when a bigger setup is inappropriate, or when I'm concerned about the potential for robbery), and I'm quite happy with it. Depending on circumstances, I'll go out with the D800 w/wider lens and GH2 telephoto, or D800 w/macro lens and GH2 telephoto. The focusing on the GH2 isn't great for eg bird photography, and the lens is on the slow side, but having a 600mm-equivalent setup as small and light as the GH2+100-300 lens is really quite something, and makes the above practical in a way that it wouldn't be with a more serious telephoto setup. I think there is a huge potential (and longterm) market for micro 4/3 for wildlife and birding enthusiasts, and maybe pros as well, especially if the autofocus and EVF continue to improve.

Best,

Brian
Logged
PeterAit
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1947



WWW
« Reply #28 on: November 19, 2013, 10:08:30 AM »
ReplyReply

I certainly can't speak for the pro market, but my current setup is this: I have a D800 for landscape and macro, and GH2 for wildlife and casual walkaround (either when a bigger setup is inappropriate, or when I'm concerned about the potential for robbery), and I'm quite happy with it. Depending on circumstances, I'll go out with the D800 w/wider lens and GH2 telephoto, or D800 w/macro lens and GH2 telephoto. The focusing on the GH2 isn't great for eg bird photography, and the lens is on the slow side, but having a 600mm-equivalent setup as small and light as the GH2+100-300 lens is really quite something, and makes the above practical in a way that it wouldn't be with a more serious telephoto setup. I think there is a huge potential (and longterm) market for micro 4/3 for wildlife and birding enthusiasts, and maybe pros as well, especially if the autofocus and EVF continue to improve.

Best,

Brian

I agree with Brian. One way to look at it is to ask yourself this question. Which photo is better?

a) The excellent quality photo I took with my micro 4/3 outfit because I had it with me.
b) The slightly better quality photo I didn't take with my full-frame Nikon because it's too bloody heavy so I left it home.
Logged

Peter
"Photographic technique is a means to an end, never the end itself."
View my photos at http://www.peteraitken.com
wildlightphoto
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 652


« Reply #29 on: November 19, 2013, 10:19:24 AM »
ReplyReply

I agree with Brian. One way to look at it is to ask yourself this question. Which photo is better?

a) The excellent quality photo I took with my micro 4/3 outfit because I had it with me.
b) The slightly better quality photo I didn't take with my full-frame Nikon because it's too bloody heavy so I left it home.

or

c) the better quality photo made with the a7r which is not too bloody big or heavy to have it with you.
Logged
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5162


« Reply #30 on: November 19, 2013, 10:35:58 AM »
ReplyReply

or

c) the better quality photo made with the a7r which is not too bloody big or heavy to have it with you.
This thread is mainly about lenses, so let me note that if you only carry the A7R _body_, you won't take any photos at all --- so let's include some _lenses_ in the kit size comparisons.

When you want significant telephoto reach, some comparisons could be
- m4/3 with 40-150 vs A7R with ?
or
- m4/3 with 75-300 or 100-300 vs A7R with ?
or
- m4/3 body with mount adaptor plus 50-200/2.8-3.5 vs A7R with ?

Small kits based on small bodies with big sensors but reasonably small lenses mostly work well on outings when one or two wide-to-normal primes are enough.
« Last Edit: November 19, 2013, 06:29:02 PM by BJL » Logged
Vladimirovich
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1320


« Reply #31 on: November 19, 2013, 12:34:49 PM »
ReplyReply

c) the better quality photo made with the a7r which is not too bloody big or heavy to have it with you.
I have heard that Sony Imaging managed to get a very lousy AF in A7s (both models)... how did they manage to do that if that is true ?
Logged
wildlightphoto
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 652


« Reply #32 on: November 19, 2013, 08:31:56 PM »
ReplyReply

I have heard that Sony Imaging managed to get a very lousy AF in A7s (both models)... how did they manage to do that if that is true ?

Let me guess... you heard it on the internet?
Logged
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6034


When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.


WWW
« Reply #33 on: November 19, 2013, 09:13:25 PM »
ReplyReply

c) the better quality photo made with the a7r which is not too bloody big or heavy to have it with you.

Jesus, people, when are you going to get it that it is not about the size or weight of the body, but lenses (i.e., the whole system)!?
« Last Edit: November 20, 2013, 09:18:57 AM by Slobodan Blagojevic » Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
Vladimirovich
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1320


« Reply #34 on: November 19, 2013, 09:43:18 PM »
ReplyReply

Let me guess... you heard it on the internet?
yes, here = http://www.dpreview.com/previews/sony-alpha-7-7r/5

"...After shooting several hundred images on our trip with Sony in Tennessee, I found far fewer sharp-focus images from my α7 shooting than from the α7R. Other editors had the same trouble, at least one declaring she had no sharp shots from the α7, while the α7R was fine. Most of the trouble I found was when shooting with the 28-70mm OSS lens, so I switched to the 35mm F2.8 just to get a few more sharp images as we walked around Rock City. I got much better, in-focus images with the 35mm and 55mm lenses..."
Logged
Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2886


« Reply #35 on: November 20, 2013, 01:22:11 AM »
ReplyReply

"...After shooting several hundred images on our trip with Sony in Tennessee..."

"... I haven't had time to pit the two cameras against each other to see if there's a real problem with the kit lens..."
Logged
Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2886


« Reply #36 on: November 20, 2013, 01:32:35 AM »
ReplyReply

I have heard that Sony Imaging managed to get a very lousy AF in A7s (both models)...

Who to believe? :-)

"far fewer sharp-focus images from my α7"

"focusing with the A7 is better"
Logged
wildlightphoto
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 652


« Reply #37 on: November 20, 2013, 09:00:02 AM »
ReplyReply

Jesus, people, when are you going to get it that it is not about the size of weight of the body, but lenses (i.e., the whole system)!?

I get it, and I'm not Jesus  Wink  There are all sorts of gradations between the D800 and the m4/3, the a7 and a7r included.  What may be a leave-it-at-home system for one may be a carry-it-everywhere system for another.  My R8/DMR & 280 APO is carry-it-everywhere for me because my preference for image quality overrides my desire for compact & light weight.  If I can get the same image quality in a smaller, lighter system I'll take that instead, but for me image quality rules and I'm willing to carry the weight.

Given a choice between putting my 280 APO on a D800 or a m43 I'll look for other options and the a7r provides the image quality I want while shaving some weight off the total system.  YMMV.
« Last Edit: November 20, 2013, 09:16:31 AM by wildlightphoto » Logged
fike
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1373


Hiker Photographer


WWW
« Reply #38 on: November 20, 2013, 10:16:32 AM »
ReplyReply

What I find annoying about the perpetual full frame versus MFT debate is that people continually seem to invade conversations about MFT devices to malign the reasonable tradeoffs and advocate for bigger and better stuff.  I don't think any serious MFT user is ignorant to the tradeoffs they are making versus full frame traditional DSLRs or the new full frame mirrorless offering from Sony.  This thread is supposed to be about How great Olympus lenses are, but here we have diverged into a debate about how much better off you will be with a brand new sony offering.  ENOUGH already!  We understand.  Full frame is awesome and will solve world hunger through better pixels.

Now I am going to go into the medium format forum  (for a system I don't own or want to own) and tell them all that they are fools for carrying such heavy gear and that they will have bent-over backs in their old age and that their pixels are too big and their lenses too wide.  Gosh there really aren't enough super telephoto lenses in medium format gear.  They really need to hear about that. 
Logged

Fike, Trailpixie, or Marc Shaffer
marcshaffer.net
TrailPixie.net

I carry an M43 ILC, a couple of good lenses, and a tripod.
Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2886


« Reply #39 on: November 20, 2013, 10:23:01 AM »
ReplyReply

people continually seem to invade conversations

People! They just do stuff because they want to!
Logged
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad