Equivalent focal length for MFT lenses

Started Apr 12, 2013 | Discussions
draleks
Junior MemberPosts: 48
Like?
Equivalent focal length for MFT lenses
Apr 12, 2013

There is a lot of talk about comparing lenses for MFT with APS or full format lenses. So I want to check if the following comparison is correct. If I have an MFT 300 mm f/6.7 lens, and a full format 600mm f/6.7 lens that is of a worse manufacturing quality and just happens to be twice as soft as the MFT lens. Then, on equal ISO values, those two lenses will be an exact match. Right?

Pedagydusz
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,362Gear list
Like?
Re: Equivalent focal length for MFT lenses
In reply to draleks, Apr 12, 2013

If you are planning to use the FF 600 mm with an adapter in a MFT camera, yes, it will give you the same FoV than the native MFT lens (presumably Olympus, the long end of the 75-300 mm ?).

But anything else will depend on the quality of both. And I imagine that you will not be able to AF with the FF lens.

-- hide signature --
 Pedagydusz's gear list:Pedagydusz's gear list
Olympus PEN E-PL5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Adobe Photoshop CS6
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Detail Man
Forum ProPosts: 15,130
Like?
Re: Equivalent focal length for MFT lenses
In reply to draleks, Apr 12, 2013

draleks wrote:

There is a lot of talk about comparing lenses for MFT with APS or full format lenses. So I want to check if the following comparison is correct. If I have an MFT 300 mm f/6.7 lens, and a full format 600mm f/6.7 lens that is of a worse manufacturing quality and just happens to be twice as soft as the MFT lens.

You've scaled the Focal Length by the ratio of the Crop Factors (for FOV), but haven't scaled the F-Number by the ratio of the Crop Factors (for DOF). "Twice as soft" is a vague phrase. The spatial frequency response of subject-matter across the image-frame is different than Depth of Field.

Then, on equal ISO values, those two lenses will be an exact match. Right?

Shutter Speed is what you want equal. Exposure/Total Light are not functions of ISO Sensitivity.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
David Kieltyka
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,407Gear list
Like?
Uh, nope
In reply to draleks, Apr 12, 2013

draleks wrote:

There is a lot of talk about comparing lenses for MFT with APS or full format lenses. So I want to check if the following comparison is correct. If I have an MFT 300 mm f/6.7 lens, and a full format 600mm f/6.7 lens that is of a worse manufacturing quality and just happens to be twice as soft as the MFT lens. Then, on equal ISO values, those two lenses will be an exact match. Right?

The poorer quality of the 35mm-format lens will reveal itself quite clearly compared to the M43 lens. I've checked this stuff out under real-world conditions.

Now--if you mount the theoretical 600mm lens on the M43 camera via adapter, and the lens just happens to perform great in the center but totally stink towards the corners--you might end up with a useful ultra-long lens for M43 cameras. I own some lenses that perform okay on 35mm but noticeably improve on M43 due to their good center performance.

If what you're getting at is DOF stuff...that's a different subject altogether, and your notion about poor lens quality being an important factor is wrong.

-Dave-

 David Kieltyka's gear list:David Kieltyka's gear list
Leica M8.2 Pentax 645D Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Olympus E-M1 +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
JeanPierre Martel
Senior MemberPosts: 1,956Gear list
Like?
Re: Equivalent focal length for MFT lenses
In reply to draleks, Apr 12, 2013

draleks wrote:

If I have an MFT 300 mm f/6.7 lens, and a full format 600mm f/6.7 lens that is of a worse manufacturing quality and just happens to be twice as soft as the MFT lens. Then, on equal ISO values, those two lenses will be an exact match. Right?

A native 300mm m4/3 lens has exactly the same narrow angle of view as a 600mm lens on a full frame camera.

A F/6,7 lens is always a F/6,7 lens. Whatever that lens is for a compact camera, a m4/3 camera ou a full frame camera. All three will bring the same number of photons per square mm on their respective sensor. So pictures taken of the same object under the same lightning conditions will produce the same bright (or dark) picture on the compact, the m4/3 or the full frame camera when shot at the same aperture (F/6,7) and same ISO settings.

What makes a difference is when a lens made for a full frame camera is used on a m4/3 camera (with an adapter). The angle of view doesn't change. The number of photons per mm2 on the m4/3 sensor doesn't change, but since that lens is made to draw a much bigger image (for a bigger senser) more light is lost inside the camera around the m4/3 sensor. In other words, light bounce back and forth inside the camera body. The consequence is that the image looks soft, specially on very pale objects and immediately around it (a halo effect).

 JeanPierre Martel's gear list:JeanPierre Martel's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12mm 1:2 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 60mm 1:2.8 Macro +19 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Martin.au
Senior MemberPosts: 6,112Gear list
Like?
Re: Equivalent focal length for MFT lenses
In reply to Pedagydusz, Apr 12, 2013

Pedagydusz wrote:

If you are planning to use the FF 600 mm with an adapter in a MFT camera, yes, it will give you the same FoV than the native MFT lens (presumably Olympus, the long end of the 75-300 mm ?).

But anything else will depend on the quality of both. And I imagine that you will not be able to AF with the FF lens.

-- hide signature --

No it won't. It will act as a 600mm lens if you mount it on a m4/3 body, giving an angle of view of 1200mm in full frame terms or 2.1 degrees.

 Martin.au's gear list:Martin.au's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M1 Panasonic Lumix G Fisheye 8mm F3.5 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-50mm 1:3.5-6.3 EZ Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 60mm 1:2.8 Macro +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
David Kieltyka
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,407Gear list
Like?
Angle-of-view & Sensor size
In reply to JeanPierre Martel, Apr 12, 2013

JeanPierre Martel wrote:

What makes a difference is when a lens made for a full frame camera is used on a m4/3 camera (with an adapter). The angle of view doesn't change.

No, the angle-of-view most certainly *does* change. This is due to the 35mm and M43 formats being different in size. A lens has no particular built-in angle-of-view. The thing that *doesn't* change is the size of the image circle projected by the lens. The smaller M43 sensor sees less of the image circle projected by the lens, and thus gives you a narrower angle-of-view than the same lens does when mounted on a 35mm camera.

My Nikon 28mm shift lens projects a huge image circle compared to my standard Nikon 28mm. But both lenses produce the same angle-of-view when mounted on the same camera.

-Dave-

 David Kieltyka's gear list:David Kieltyka's gear list
Leica M8.2 Pentax 645D Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Olympus E-M1 +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
draleks
Junior MemberPosts: 48
Like?
Re: Equivalent focal length for MFT lenses
In reply to JeanPierre Martel, Apr 13, 2013

JeanPierre Martel wrote:

draleks wrote:

If I have an MFT 300 mm f/6.7 lens, and a full format 600mm f/6.7 lens that is of a worse manufacturing quality and just happens to be twice as soft as the MFT lens. Then, on equal ISO values, those two lenses will be an exact match. Right?

A native 300mm m4/3 lens has exactly the same narrow angle of view as a 600mm lens on a full frame camera.

A F/6,7 lens is always a F/6,7 lens. Whatever that lens is for a compact camera, a m4/3 camera ou a full frame camera. All three will bring the same number of photons per square mm on their respective sensor. So pictures taken of the same object under the same lightning conditions will produce the same bright (or dark) picture on the compact, the m4/3 or the full frame camera when shot at the same aperture (F/6,7) and same ISO settings.

What makes a difference is when a lens made for a full frame camera is used on a m4/3 camera (with an adapter). The angle of view doesn't change. The number of photons per mm2 on the m4/3 sensor doesn't change, but since that lens is made to draw a much bigger image (for a bigger senser) more light is lost inside the camera around the m4/3 sensor. In other words, light bounce back and forth inside the camera body. The consequence is that the image looks soft, specially on very pale objects and immediately around it (a halo effect).

Interesting point about light bouncing inside the camera body. Everything there is black, at least on my camera, but in high contrast situation there will have to be some reflections.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
draleks
Junior MemberPosts: 48
Like?
Re: Uh, nope
In reply to David Kieltyka, Apr 13, 2013

David Kieltyka wrote:

draleks wrote:

There is a lot of talk about comparing lenses for MFT with APS or full format lenses. So I want to check if the following comparison is correct. If I have an MFT 300 mm f/6.7 lens, and a full format 600mm f/6.7 lens that is of a worse manufacturing quality and just happens to be twice as soft as the MFT lens. Then, on equal ISO values, those two lenses will be an exact match. Right?

The poorer quality of the 35mm-format lens will reveal itself quite clearly compared to the M43 lens. I've checked this stuff out under real-world conditions.

Now--if you mount the theoretical 600mm lens on the M43 camera via adapter, and the lens just happens to perform great in the center but totally stink towards the corners--you might end up with a useful ultra-long lens for M43 cameras. I own some lenses that perform okay on 35mm but noticeably improve on M43 due to their good center performance.

If what you're getting at is DOF stuff...that's a different subject altogether, and your notion about poor lens quality being an important factor is wrong.

-Dave-

Right, I see what you mean. But what if I mount the MFT lens on an MFT body and the FF lens on an FF body? Will the IQ be compareble then?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
draleks
Junior MemberPosts: 48
Like?
Re: Equivalent focal length for MFT lenses
In reply to Martin.au, Apr 13, 2013

Mjankor wrote:

Pedagydusz wrote:

If you are planning to use the FF 600 mm with an adapter in a MFT camera, yes, it will give you the same FoV than the native MFT lens (presumably Olympus, the long end of the 75-300 mm ?).

But anything else will depend on the quality of both. And I imagine that you will not be able to AF with the FF lens.

-- hide signature --

No it won't. It will act as a 600mm lens if you mount it on a m4/3 body, giving an angle of view of 1200mm in full frame terms or 2.1 degrees.

I agree it won't. I meant the FF lens mounted on an FF body. Sorry about not being clear enough about this.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
slimandy
Forum ProPosts: 14,574Gear list
Like?
Re: Equivalent focal length for MFT lenses
In reply to draleks, Apr 13, 2013

You need to clarify the question a bit. Are you using them both on the same body?

Bear in mind the focal length does not change. The difference comes from the size of the sensor, not the length of the lens. A 600mm lens is twice as long as a 300mm lens.

A 300mm f6.7 lens on MFT will give an equivalent field of view and depth of field as a 600mm f13 lens on FF.

If you use a 600mm f6.7 lens on MFT it will give you the equivalent of 1200mm f13 on FF.

If you are using a 600mm f6.7 on FF and want to replicate it on MFT you will need a 300mm f3.5.

-- hide signature --

www.andrewsandersphotography.co.uk

 slimandy's gear list:slimandy's gear list
Sony RX100 II Nikon D200 Nikon D700 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Fujifilm X-E1 +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
slimandy
Forum ProPosts: 14,574Gear list
Like?
Re: Equivalent focal length for MFT lenses
In reply to JeanPierre Martel, Apr 13, 2013

JeanPierre Martel wrote:

draleks wrote:

If I have an MFT 300 mm f/6.7 lens, and a full format 600mm f/6.7 lens that is of a worse manufacturing quality and just happens to be twice as soft as the MFT lens. Then, on equal ISO values, those two lenses will be an exact match. Right?

A native 300mm m4/3 lens has exactly the same narrow angle of view as a 600mm lens on a full frame camera.

A F/6,7 lens is always a F/6,7 lens.

I think this is where people get confused about equivalents. You are right, the actual aperture does not change, BUT NEITHER DOES THE ACTUAL FOCAL LENGTH. What we are talking about when comparing to FF is the equivalent field of view and depth of field that results form the smaller sensor size. A 300mm f6.7 lens is always a 300mm f6.7 lens, but the equivalent FF lens would be 600mm f13.

-- hide signature --

www.andrewsandersphotography.co.uk

 slimandy's gear list:slimandy's gear list
Sony RX100 II Nikon D200 Nikon D700 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Fujifilm X-E1 +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
KenBalbari
Regular MemberPosts: 275Gear list
Like?
Re: Equivalent focal length for MFT lenses
In reply to draleks, Apr 13, 2013

No, you will have very different depth of field in your example, plus the FF sensor will have less noise, better dynamic range, and likely better color depth. In addition, you don't really need to say "twice as soft" for the lens, as a 300mm lens will naturally have twice the power of a 600mm lens of equal quality.  If the glass is equal, the 600mm will be "twice as soft" so to speak, if you are comparing on a lp/mm basis.

But the best way to do equivalence is to realize that the apperture changes if you fix the f-stop and change the focal length.  This is because what the "f" in f/6.7 stands for is "focal length".  Those who deny this simply don't understand what an f-stop is. So if you change the focal length from 300mm to 600mm, in order to keep the aperture (and depth of field) the same, you need to also change f/6.7 to f/13.4.

Now you have the same amount of total light, but it is being spread into 4 times the area on the 135 film format sensor. So the exposure is less.  To adjust for that, you need to increase the sensitivity 4 times (2 stops), so from ISO 200 to ISO 800 for example.

This will give you as near as you are going to get to an "equivalent" image. So a 300mm f/6.7 ISO 200 on mFT produces an image equivalent to a 600mm f/13.4 ISO 800 on 135 film format.

In reality, the 135 film sized sensor in this case will likely show at least a bit more noise (in practice, the noise difference in most cases at equal ISO currently seems to be closer to one stop than the 2 stops the difference in area implies).  On the other hand, as you get to f-stops below f2.8 on mFT, and especially below f2.0, aberrations become a problem which make it difficult to maintain equivalent sharpness, so in the real world "full frame" does maintain an advantage in many cases where narrow depth of field is desired.

It is much simpler, and more common however, to ignore depth of field, sensitivity, noise and exposure differences, and simply talk of equivalent "angle of view".  From that point of view, 300mm on mFT has an equivalent angle of view to 600mm on full 135 film format.  You don't need to mention the f-stop, if you don't want to worry about these other aspects.

 KenBalbari's gear list:KenBalbari's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix F30 Zoom Olympus E-330 Olympus PEN E-PL2
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Anders W
Forum ProPosts: 18,348Gear list
Like?
Re: Equivalent focal length for MFT lenses
In reply to draleks, Apr 13, 2013

draleks wrote:

There is a lot of talk about comparing lenses for MFT with APS or full format lenses. So I want to check if the following comparison is correct. If I have an MFT 300 mm f/6.7 lens, and a full format 600mm f/6.7 lens that is of a worse manufacturing quality and just happens to be twice as soft as the MFT lens. Then, on equal ISO values, those two lenses will be an exact match. Right?

I am not sure exactly what you are getting at here. But as far as resolution is concerned, an MFT lens mounted on an MFT camera has to have twice the resolution per mm on the sensor as an FF lens on an FF camera in order to yield an equally sharp image when the two images are displayed at the same size. This is because the image from the smaller MFT sensor has to be magnified twice as much to reach the same display size as the image from the FF sensor. In this regard, the MFT lens faces a tougher challenge than the FF lens. On the other hand, the FF lens faces the difficulty of having to cover an image circle with twice the diameter of the MFT lens. This evens out the score.

As to exposure and ISO, the two camera-lens combos (300 on MFT versus 600 on FF) will behave the same way. However, at any given exposure setting, e.g., f/6.7 and 1/1000 s, the FF combo will accumulate four times as much light due to the sensor area being four times larger. At the same time it will have more shallow depth of field at the same subject distance (and thus the same magnification). In order for the two combos to gather the same amount of light and have the same depth of field, the FF lens would have to be stopped down two stops further than the MFT lens, e.g., f/6.7 on MFT versus f/13 on FF.

 Anders W's gear list:Anders W's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M1 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH +21 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Domagoj Batinic
Contributing MemberPosts: 513Gear list
Like?
Re: Uh, nope
In reply to draleks, Apr 13, 2013

draleks wrote:

Right, I see what you mean. But what if I mount the MFT lens on an MFT body and the FF lens on an FF body? Will the IQ be compareble then?

apples and oranges, because you don't have exactly the same lens on both bodies, lens from different manufacturers will have different qualities and different variables influencing the IQ

-- hide signature --

my gear:
E-M5+45mm/1.8
E-520+12-60+14-42+70-300+Sigma 105 + FL-50R+EC20 + SRF-11
and good number of legacy lenses (list in profile)

 Domagoj Batinic's gear list:Domagoj Batinic's gear list
Olympus D-620L Olympus C-2000 Zoom Olympus C-8080 Wide Zoom Olympus SP-550 UZ Olympus SP-560 UZ +11 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
JeanPierre Martel
Senior MemberPosts: 1,956Gear list
Like?
Re: Angle-of-view & Sensor size
In reply to David Kieltyka, Apr 13, 2013

David Kieltyka wrote:

JeanPierre Martel wrote:

What makes a difference is when a lens made for a full frame camera is used on a m4/3 camera (with an adapter). The angle of view doesn't change.

No, the angle-of-view most certainly *does* change.

Sorry. You're right.

 JeanPierre Martel's gear list:JeanPierre Martel's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12mm 1:2 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 60mm 1:2.8 Macro +19 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
rrr_hhh
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,920Gear list
Like?
Re: Equivalent focal length for MFT lenses
In reply to KenBalbari, Apr 13, 2013

KenBalbari wrote:

No, you will have very different depth of field in your example, plus the FF sensor will have less noise, better dynamic range, and likely better color depth. In addition, you don't really need to say "twice as soft" for the lens, as a 300mm lens will naturally have twice the power of a 600mm lens of equal quality.  If the glass is equal, the 600mm will be "twice as soft" so to speak, if you are comparing on a lp/mm basis.

But the best way to do equivalence is to realize that the apperture changes if you fix the f-stop and change the focal length.  This is because what the "f" in f/6.7 stands for is "focal length".  Those who deny this simply don't understand what an f-stop is. So if you change the focal length from 300mm to 600mm, in order to keep the aperture (and depth of field) the same, you need to also change f/6.7 to f/13.4.

F doesn't stand for focal length, although it has something to do with the focal length. The F number is a ratio and like all ratios also a dimensionless number, unlike the focal length which is measured in mm. It is the result of the focal length divided by the diameter of the entrance pupil of the lens. In fact F6.7 is a shortening of 1/6.7, aka the F number is the denominator of a ratio whose numerator is reduced to 1; this is why a greater F number corresponds to a smaller aperture and a small number to a greater aperture; F6.7 is an indication of the density of the light which will be allowed on the sensor ; it will remain the same for any sensor because it is a density. Here is what Wikipedia says about it : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-number.

rrr_hhh

 rrr_hhh's gear list:rrr_hhh's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Canon EOS 6D Sony Alpha 7R
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
JeanPierre Martel
Senior MemberPosts: 1,956Gear list
Like?
Re: Equivalent focal length for MFT lenses
In reply to draleks, Apr 13, 2013

draleks wrote:

JeanPierre Martel wrote:

since that lens is made to draw a much bigger image (for a bigger senser) more light is lost inside the camera around the m4/3 sensor. In other words, light bounce back and forth inside the camera body. The consequence is that the image looks soft, specially on very pale objects and immediately around it (a halo effect).

Interesting point about light bouncing inside the camera body. Everything there is black, at least on my camera, but in high contrast situation there will have to be some reflections.

The color inside body cameras is said to be black. But actually, it's dark a grey color in North America (and a dark gray colour in UK). In order to appear so, that means that light is partially reflected. That explains the "halo effect" that I was talking about (on and around very pale objects).

If ever Panasonic and Olympus want instant sharpness improvement on their m4/3 cameras, they just have to start using really black coating inside their cameras. Unfortunately, users will start to complaint that these new models attracts dust more than the previous ones (simply because dust will be more obvious)...

 JeanPierre Martel's gear list:JeanPierre Martel's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12mm 1:2 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 60mm 1:2.8 Macro +19 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
JeanPierre Martel
Senior MemberPosts: 1,956Gear list
Like?
Re: Equivalent focal length for MFT lenses
In reply to slimandy, Apr 13, 2013

slimandy wrote:

JeanPierre Martel wrote:
A native 300mm m4/3 lens has exactly the same narrow angle of view as a 600mm lens on a full frame camera.

A F/6,7 lens is always a F/6,7 lens.

I think this is where people get confused about equivalents. You are right, the actual aperture does not change, BUT NEITHER DOES THE ACTUAL FOCAL LENGTH. What we are talking about when comparing to FF is the equivalent field of view and depth of field that results form the smaller sensor size. A 300mm f6.7 lens is always a 300mm f/6.7 lens, but the equivalent FF lens would be 600mm f/13.

Let me disagree. At the same ISO setting, the image shot by a 300mm m4/3 lens on a m4/3 camera will be exactly the same as the one taken by a 600mm FF lens on a FF camera when both apertures are set to F/6,7.

Of course, the diameter of the opening of the diaphragm at F/6,7 will be wider for the FF lens, compared to one on the m4/3 lens. So are their sensors. The end result is that the number of photons per square mm will be the same at F/6,7 and consequently, the image will be as dark or as pale on the FF as it is on a m4/3 camera.

However, it is true that if we put a m4/3 lens on a FF camera (using duck tape to hold it), a 300mm m4/3 lens at F/6.7 will draw a small image on the FF sensor and consequently, the average number of photons per square mm on the whole FF sensor will be lower and will then be equivalent to a 600mm FF lens at F/13.

But who on Earth would put a m4/3 lens on a FF camera?

 JeanPierre Martel's gear list:JeanPierre Martel's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12mm 1:2 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 60mm 1:2.8 Macro +19 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
JeanPierre Martel
Senior MemberPosts: 1,956Gear list
Like?
Re: Uh, nope
In reply to draleks, Apr 13, 2013

draleks wrote:
Right, I see what you mean. But what if I mount the MFT lens on an MFT body and the FF lens on an FF body? Will the IQ be comparable then?

There is a relation between sensor size and IQ. Everybody knows that large-sensor compacts and mirrorless cameras take better images than compacts with tiny sensors.

So FF cameras have a slightly wider dynamic range (IQ) than m4/3 cameras. It was very obvious with first generation of m4/3 cameras: it's less obvious with the latest ones, but that's still true, even today.

Theoretically, the same should be true when m4/3 cameras are compared to APS-C cameras. But there is a controversy about that. Because all our lenses are state-of-the-art lenses, made during the last few years, they are all good and, sometimes, exceptionally good. That blurs the gap in such an extend that we can say that the IQ in a camera like the OM-D, is as good or better than some reflex cameras.

 JeanPierre Martel's gear list:JeanPierre Martel's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12mm 1:2 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 60mm 1:2.8 Macro +19 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads