V1/V2 vs OM-D E-M10 (take 2)

Started 4 months ago | Discussions thread
dougjgreen1
Senior MemberPosts: 2,061Gear list
Like?
Re: Not to mention all those great fast M4/3 prime lenses
In reply to BarnET, 4 months ago

BarnET wrote:

dougjgreen1 wrote:

Nikon 1 has 3 primes, which can be described as:

1) an inexpensive 10mm f2.8 pancake wide angle - basically comparable to the Panasonic 14mm f2.5

The Pana is faster and the sensor is nearly double the surface area.

I agree - so? The Nikon lens is also less expensive

2) The 18.5mm f1.8 - a good, fast normal lens - comparable to the Olympus 25mm f1.8

Uhm no it's not even close.

Have you used both? If you have, I'll take your word for it. If not, what's your basis for that claim?

3) The 32mm f1.2 - very fast portrait length lens, - comparable to the Leica Nocticron 42.5mm f1.2

LMAO, never heard of light gathering, O.I.S.

Both lenses are f1.2. I was not referring to depth of field, I WAS referring to light gathering - which is the same for any f1.2 lens. Not sure that OIS is reason to justify a $700 higher price for the Noct. Maybe they sell the lenses by the ounce.

Now, all of these Nikon 1 lenses cost at least 1/3 less than the Micro 4/3 alternatives, which is nice, but there are many other fast prime lens choices for Micro 4/3 as well:

They are nowhere near their equiv. and the 10mm F2.8 is not 1/3 the price of the 14mm

I never said it was 1/3 the cost. I said it was 1/3 less, i.e. 2/3 the cost. Typical cost for new lenses split from kits is $115-120 for the 10mm Nikon, $175 - 180 for the Panasonic 14mm.

12mm f2, 15mm f1.7, 17mm f1.8, 20mm f1.7, 25mm f1.4, 45mm f1.8, 75mm f1.8

And the 20mm F1.7 is good value. Cheaper then the Oly 25mm Just like the 45mm F1.8 which becomes an 90mm F3.6 very close to the nikon 32mm at 85mm f3.3

as well as several slower but more economical lens choices as well:

Sigma's 19mm, 30mm, and 60mm f2.8 lenses,

These are great lenses for Apsc camera's like the Sony NEX line. The Focal lengths on m43 are not that useful and there are smaller faster options available.

Actually, I find the Sigma 19mm and 60mm to be EXTREMELY useful on Micro 4/3 - The 19mm is sharper than the Olympus 17mm lenses, and much faster to focus than the Panasonic 20mm. And the 60mm is simply a spectacular lens that fills a useful short-medium telephoto slot. I agree with respect to the 30mm.

look at this to make it clear how inferior the Nikon 1 system really is!

http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Nikon-1-NIKKOR-18-5mm-F18-on-Nikon-1-V1-versus-Sigma-30mm-F28-EX-DN-Sony-E-on-Sony-A3000___1020_745_828_906

That test says much more about the sensor resolution than it does about the lenses. The fact is, the identical lens always scores higher in the DxO metric when it's used on a bigger sensor - even if the performance of that lens is dreadful in the extremities that are outside of the smaller sensor, and good in the center. Check out the old Nikon 24-120mm zoom for a textbook example of this.

About the same equiv. focal range and DOUBLE the resolution

Which, as I said, is a function of the sensor, not the lens

as well as

Olympus 17mm f2.8 pancake,

That olympus is a soft lens that should be avoided

Yes, so? it's maybe the one example of a dud lens in the whole system.

and the twomuch cheaper Olympus Body cap lenses, 9mm f8 and 15mm f8.

In addition, Micro 4/3 has not only economical kit level zoom lenses, but also constant aperture pro caliber zoom lenses from both Panasonic and Olympus, in both the wide to short tele range, as well as in the ultra-wide range, and the moderate tele range.

The ONLY Nikon 1 lens that is not matched or exceeded in Micro 4/3 is the new 70-300mm.

Which is a 1000!!!! dollars for a 70-300 for a pathetic system

It's got far superior features to the Micro 4/3 300mm zooms. Nikon makes a comparable lens to the two long zooms in Micro 4/3, that you can buy for much less (used ones go for around $325), and use with an adapter, but to resolve a tight-packed sensor requires a better lens. I'm expecting this Nikkor will deliver to that, given it's design, construction, coatings. etc.

Micro 4/3 has a good 75-300 which is half that much. and who needs that range anyway on a mirrorless. Get the Tamron 150-600 for the same money on a proper Nikon Dslr if your into this kind of work.

Very unlikely that the Micro 4/3 75-300 lens (or the 100-300) is anywhere near as good as the new Nikkor, given the design of this Nikkor, and the indifferent test results for the Oly 75-300 and Panasonic 100-300.

Look - I happen to be an advocate of Micro 4/3 for most things, relative to Nikon 1. But shooting action with long telephotos is simply not one of those things. I use Micro 4/3 for 80+% of what I shoot - but the system has a deficiency in shooting action with long telephotos - and that happens to be the Nikon 1 system's main strength - particularly in good light.

 dougjgreen1's gear list:dougjgreen1's gear list
Olympus Stylus XZ-10 Olympus PEN E-PL5 Nikon 1 V2 Olympus E-M1 Olympus Zuiko Digital 11-22mm 1:2.8-3.5 +11 more
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