Comparing Olympus 4/3lenses to FX "Full Frame" offerings

Started 10 months ago | Discussions thread
Great Bustard
Forum ProPosts: 24,663
Like?
Oh?
In reply to dave gaines, 10 months ago

dave gaines wrote:

This thread and my OP is about the lens options, not equivalency. I'm comparing the best HG and SHG Olympus lenses to what is available from Nikon in FX. I'm clearly writting about finding Nikon f/2.8 that will perform as well as Olympus HG and SHG lenses. I'm comparing the best lenses of one brand to the best of another.

OK. But you said:

"Don't bother looking for anything like a 50-200 mm f/2.8-3.5 in FX for close to the same price. You'll need the 200-400 mm f/4 for US$6750."

No, the 200-400 / 4 on FF is like a 100-200 / 2 on 4/3, not like a 50-200 / 2.8-3.5.  The 70-300 / 4-5.6 on FF (equivalent to a 35-150 / 2-2.8) is a lot more like a 50-200 / 2.8-3.5 on 4/3 than is the 200-400 / 4 VR.

It's unfortunate that someone has hijacked this thread to start an argument about equivalency with as many people as he could get angry enough to reply. He's kept it going by bending the subject to fit his ever-changing points.

The above more than explains why a discussion of Equivalence came about.

I wish people would stop responding to this inane argument, ignore people who post these off-topic flames and Complain when they get abusive. You don't have to attend every argument you're invited to.

I got just the thing for you:  a Panasonic FZ200 with a 24-600 / 2.8 lens.  Smaller, lighter, and way less expensive than any DSLR or mirrorless ILC system and none of them have a lens like that.  As an added bonus, you'll never have to "struggle" for more DOF.

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