Compact DSLR vs. OM-D

Started Mar 30, 2013 | Discussions thread
forpetessake
Senior MemberPosts: 3,521
Like?
Re: Compact DSLR vs. OM-D
In reply to SDPharm, Mar 31, 2013

SDPharm wrote:

But when equivalent lenses do exist in both systems, such as the 35-100 / 2 on 4/3 vs the 70-200 / 4L IS on 35mm FF, the lenses for the larger sensor systems are  usually lighter <

I'm not sure what world you live in, but here's a real world example of the 'equivalent lens' comparison:

Panasonic 35-100/2.8: 360 g

Canon 70-200/2.8 II: 1490 g

Both are expensive, excellent lenses.  The FF lens is more than 4x the weight.

How many times should the equivalence be explained here that people may finally learn? The equivalent lenses result in the same image on different size sensors. You are again comparing apples and oranges. If you want compare Panasonic 35-100/2.8 to equivalent FF lens then find 70-200mm/5.6. Nobody does such lens, because FF lenses traditionally much faster, but it's not difficult to understand that such lens wouldn't be any heavier than its m4/3 equivalent.

B.t.w. I provided educational links, it makes sense to read them, otherwise people keep rehashing the same misinformation again and again.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow