Telecentricity in Micro Four Thirds.

Started 11 months ago | Discussions
exdeejjjaaaa
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,770Gear list
Like?
Re: Thanks for the info ...
In reply to alatchin, 11 months ago

alatchin wrote:

Also the Olympus seems to have little to no issues unlike the Panasonic lens which has had a number o fhtreads about purple flare?

that was an issue w/ Olympus design IR/UV cut filtering in sensor assembly - letting too much close to UV spectrum through, not Panasonic fault in lens design... so put the blame where it belongs

 exdeejjjaaaa's gear list:exdeejjjaaaa's gear list
Olympus E-M1 Sony Alpha 7 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Panasonic Leica DG Macro-Elmarit 45mm F2.8 ASPH OIS Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH +23 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Anders W
Forum ProPosts: 18,016Gear list
Like?
Re: Thanks for the info ...
In reply to alatchin, 11 months ago

alatchin wrote:

Steve_ wrote:

I'm not sure this isn't a product of how large and optically uncompromised the 4/3s zooms were. It's hard to correct a lens as fully when compactness and light weight are leading priorities.

Large? I don' think they were too large but I agree that maybe we as users did not appreciate fully how good those lenses were.

Compare the size of the Oly 4/3 7-14 to that of the Panasonic m43 7-14,

A lot of the size savings from the 7-14 seem to be due to the mirror box in this case creating the need for a more complex design... Also the Olympus seems to have little to no issues unlike the Panasonic lens which has had a number o fhtreads about purple flare?

The purple-flare issue is due to the fact that a) the antireflective coatings on at least some of the lens elements of the 7-14 do not fully remove reflections close to the border between ultraviolet and violet and b) the on-sensor UV-filter on most/all Oly bodies, unlike that in most/all Panasonic bodies, does not eliminate these wavelengths. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the issue discussed in this thread. See here for additional details:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51390321

14-35/2.0 to the 12-35/2.8,

Software correction and a 1 stop aperture difference... Also the 12-35 doesnt even compare well against the 12-60 43rds lens for sharpness, let alone the 14-35.

What directly comparable evidence can you muster in support of your claims regarding sharpness?

There is no free lunch, software correction and slow apertures will make smaller lenses. These smaller lenses will not outperform larger lenses for IQ reasons, they will have different advantages (size portability, comfort in use, price etc.)

What evidence can you muster in support of your claim that the smaller lenses MFT lenses cannot outperform the larger FT lenses, everything else equal (including max aperture).

 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
alatchin
Contributing MemberPosts: 759Gear list
Like?
Re: Thanks for the info ...
In reply to Anders W, 11 months ago

Anders W wrote:

alatchin wrote:

Steve_ wrote:

I'm not sure this isn't a product of how large and optically uncompromised the 4/3s zooms were. It's hard to correct a lens as fully when compactness and light weight are leading priorities.

Large? I don' think they were too large but I agree that maybe we as users did not appreciate fully how good those lenses were.

Compare the size of the Oly 4/3 7-14 to that of the Panasonic m43 7-14,

A lot of the size savings from the 7-14 seem to be due to the mirror box in this case creating the need for a more complex design... Also the Olympus seems to have little to no issues unlike the Panasonic lens which has had a number o fhtreads about purple flare?

The purple-flare issue is due to the fact that a) the antireflective coatings on at least some of the lens elements of the 7-14 do not fully remove reflections close to the border between ultraviolet and violet and b) the on-sensor UV-filter on most/all Oly bodies, unlike that in most/all Panasonic bodies, does not eliminate these wavelengths. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the issue discussed in this thread. See here for additional details:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51390321

14-35/2.0 to the 12-35/2.8,

Software correction and a 1 stop aperture difference... Also the 12-35 doesnt even compare well against the 12-60 43rds lens for sharpness, let alone the 14-35.

What directly comparable evidence can you muster in support of your claims regarding sharpness?

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/olympus_om_d_e_m5_review.shtml#lumix

Not a thorough review, but there is clearly a difference. As the 14-35 is a better performing lens then the 12-60 it simply is what it is.

There is no free lunch, software correction and slow apertures will make smaller lenses. These smaller lenses will not outperform larger lenses for IQ reasons, they will have different advantages (size portability, comfort in use, price etc.)

What evidence can you muster in support of your claim that the smaller lenses MFT lenses cannot outperform the larger FT lenses, everything else equal (including max aperture).

WHat does all else being equal mean? If I stop the 12-60 down to f5.6 and compare images to the kit zoom wide open i think the results will be obvious. My phrasing was slightly off as I was in a hurry, by larger my contention was that a faster lens such as the 12-60 vs the 12-50 (as brought up by steve) the 12-50 cannot keep up.

Now the 12-40 f2.8 may well be a sharper lens, and it is smaller than the 12-60, but it takes advantage of the mirrorless design, uses digital correction (which I dont hold anything against) and is 20mm shorter at the telephoto end.

So there are real differences beyond just it being a m43rds lens. Plus it is actually quite alot larger than the average m43rds zoom... My guess it to keep the quality higher.

-- hide signature --

“You don’t take a photograph, you make it.” -Ansel Adams
blog.alatchinphotography(dot)com

 alatchin's gear list:alatchin's gear list
Olympus E-3 Olympus PEN E-P2 Olympus PEN E-PL2 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus PEN E-PL5 +20 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
alatchin
Contributing MemberPosts: 759Gear list
Like?
Re: Thanks for the info ...
In reply to exdeejjjaaaa, 11 months ago

exdeejjjaaaa wrote:

alatchin wrote:

Also the Olympus seems to have little to no issues unlike the Panasonic lens which has had a number o fhtreads about purple flare?

that was an issue w/ Olympus design IR/UV cut filtering in sensor assembly - letting too much close to UV spectrum through, not Panasonic fault in lens design... so put the blame where it belongs

I am not blaming anyone. It is a fact. Another fact is the 7-14 olympus lens doesnt exhibit the same flare.

I dont care for the brand bashing, I am simply stating that the smaller lenses, while being perfectly good lenses, are not necessarily the equal of their larger cousins.

-- hide signature --

“You don’t take a photograph, you make it.” -Ansel Adams
blog.alatchinphotography(dot)com

 alatchin's gear list:alatchin's gear list
Olympus E-3 Olympus PEN E-P2 Olympus PEN E-PL2 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus PEN E-PL5 +20 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
s_grins
Veteran MemberPosts: 8,748Gear list
Like?
Re: Thanks for the info ...
In reply to alatchin, 11 months ago

alatchin wrote:

exdeejjjaaaa wrote:

alatchin wrote:

Also the Olympus seems to have little to no issues unlike the Panasonic lens which has had a number o fhtreads about purple flare?

that was an issue w/ Olympus design IR/UV cut filtering in sensor assembly - letting too much close to UV spectrum through, not Panasonic fault in lens design... so put the blame where it belongs

I am not blaming anyone. It is a fact. Another fact is the 7-14 olympus lens doesnt exhibit the same flare.

I dont care for the brand bashing, I am simply stating that the smaller lenses, while being perfectly good lenses, are not necessarily the equal of their larger cousins.

-- hide signature --

“You don’t take a photograph, you make it.” -Ansel Adams
blog.alatchinphotography(dot)com

If you try hard, you can get flare with any lens. This is the matter of personal skills

-- hide signature --

Looking for equilibrium...

 s_grins's gear list:s_grins's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Panasonic Lumix G Vario 45-200mm F4-5.6 OIS Sigma 30mm F2.8 EX DN +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
micksh6
Senior MemberPosts: 2,551Gear list
Like?
Re: Telecentricity in Micro Four Third
In reply to Tom Axford, 11 months ago

Tom Axford wrote:

The MFT manufacturers claim that their lenses are near telecentric and I see no reason to disbelieve them.

In discussing this it is important to understand what telecentric means.

For a telecentric lens the principal light rays forming the image are parallel to the optic axis (a line through the centre of the lens) when they leave the back of the lens, even at the edges of the image. See this article for a fuller explanation.

It has nothing whatever to do with the distance between the back of the lens and the sensor. But the back element of the lens must be at least as large as the sensor itself for a fully telecentric lens.

m4/3 sensor has 21.6 mm diagonal. From my lenses Oly 75mm F1.8 probably has the largest rear element diameter and it's slightly less than that, no more than 21mm. I don't have F2.8 zooms though.

Other lenses have smaller rear element - Pana 20mm - 18mm diameter, kit lenses even smaller and Samyang fisheye has a tiny rear element.

Judged by that it's hard to find truly telecentric m4/3 lens.

 micksh6's gear list:micksh6's gear list
Olympus PEN E-PL5 Olympus E-M1 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm 1:4.0-5.6 Panasonic Leica Summilux DG 25mm F1.4 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
micksh6
Senior MemberPosts: 2,551Gear list
Like?
Re: Thanks for the info ...
In reply to Steve_, 11 months ago

Steve_ wrote:

exdeejjjaaaa wrote:

Steve_ wrote:

exdeejjjaaaa wrote:

Steve_ wrote:

And this is evident from the (extortionate for me) amount of purple fringing and distortion especially at the wide end of the zooms.

I'm not sure this isn't a product of how large and optically uncompromised the 4/3s zooms were.

rumor has it that Olympus took existing FF designs and added wideconverters (for some lenses)... rumor though.

Pretty impossibly naive rumor, though. You don't achieve the optical perfection the Oly SHG lenses represent - nor even the performance level of the HG series - via a tele-converter.

dear, wide converter - not tele converter... and wide converter specifically designed to work with the specific lens (unlike generic ones) indeed makes things better (not worse like teles)
PS: this is a note about converter, not that the rumor is true

Sorry, I typed the wrong word. Let's try 'via a converter'. Adapting the FOV of an independent lens design can only hurt resolution and distortion behavior.

I would say in this case you cannot separate the technical aspect from the rumor itself - one disproves the other.

You probably need to read Metabones Speedbooster adapter white paper. It explains why rear mounted wide-angle converter can improve sharpness.

 micksh6's gear list:micksh6's gear list
Olympus PEN E-PL5 Olympus E-M1 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm 1:4.0-5.6 Panasonic Leica Summilux DG 25mm F1.4 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
alatchin
Contributing MemberPosts: 759Gear list
Like?
Re: Thanks for the info ...
In reply to s_grins, 11 months ago

s_grins wrote:

alatchin wrote:

exdeejjjaaaa wrote:

alatchin wrote:

Also the Olympus seems to have little to no issues unlike the Panasonic lens which has had a number o fhtreads about purple flare?

that was an issue w/ Olympus design IR/UV cut filtering in sensor assembly - letting too much close to UV spectrum through, not Panasonic fault in lens design... so put the blame where it belongs

I am not blaming anyone. It is a fact. Another fact is the 7-14 olympus lens doesnt exhibit the same flare.

I dont care for the brand bashing, I am simply stating that the smaller lenses, while being perfectly good lenses, are not necessarily the equal of their larger cousins.

-- hide signature --

“You don’t take a photograph, you make it.” -Ansel Adams
blog.alatchinphotography(dot)com

If you try hard, you can get flare with any lens. This is the matter of personal skills

One of the biggest wastes of time on this forum is arguments that only operate on tangents. I didnt say you couldn't get flare with lenses in general.

-- hide signature --

Looking for equilibrium...

-- hide signature --

“You don’t take a photograph, you make it.” -Ansel Adams
blog.alatchinphotography(dot)com

 alatchin's gear list:alatchin's gear list
Olympus E-3 Olympus PEN E-P2 Olympus PEN E-PL2 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus PEN E-PL5 +20 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
zkz5
Contributing MemberPosts: 662Gear list
Like?
focus breathing?
In reply to Tom Axford, 11 months ago

Tom Axford wrote:

The MFT manufacturers claim that their lenses are near telecentric and I see no reason to disbelieve them.

...

You can use this property to check for yourself whether or not your lenses are telecentric. Put your camera on a tripod and switch to manual focus. Then change from focus at infinity to focus at the closest point possible and see what happens to objects at the edge of the image frame. If they just go in and out of focus without changing position, then your lens is telecentric or nearly so.

So in otherwords, a telecentric lens has no "focus breathing"?

In that case there are definitely MFT lenses that are not telecentric. With the Oly 9-18, the image changes size (like zooming) quite a lot when it focuses.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Tom Axford
Senior MemberPosts: 1,255
Like?
Re: focus breathing?
In reply to zkz5, 11 months ago

zkz5 wrote:

Tom Axford wrote:

The MFT manufacturers claim that their lenses are near telecentric and I see no reason to disbelieve them.

...

You can use this property to check for yourself whether or not your lenses are telecentric. Put your camera on a tripod and switch to manual focus. Then change from focus at infinity to focus at the closest point possible and see what happens to objects at the edge of the image frame. If they just go in and out of focus without changing position, then your lens is telecentric or nearly so.

So in otherwords, a telecentric lens has no "focus breathing"?

In that case there are definitely MFT lenses that are not telecentric. With the Oly 9-18, the image changes size (like zooming) quite a lot when it focuses.

Yes, the shorter the focal length, the harder it is to make the lens telecentric. Very long focal length lenses are naturally much nearer to being telecentric.

The 9-18 lens certainly isn't fully telecentric, but I suspect it may be closer to being telecentric than many older designs of FF lenses with focal lengths between 18 and 36mm.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
bobn2
Forum ProPosts: 30,056
Like?
Re: Thanks for the info ...
In reply to exdeejjjaaaa, 11 months ago

exdeejjjaaaa wrote:

Steve_ wrote:

And this is evident from the (extortionate for me) amount of purple fringing and distortion especially at the wide end of the zooms.

I'm not sure this isn't a product of how large and optically uncompromised the 4/3s zooms were.

rumor has it that Olympus took existing FF designs and added wideconverters (for some lenses)... rumor though.

I don't think anyone suggested that they took existing designs. It's quite true though that the f/2 zooms (and the 7-14) have a 0.5x focal reducer at the back (like a built in 'Speed Booster') which means that the front end must be a design with 2x the focal length.

-- hide signature --

Bob

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Joel Halbert
Regular MemberPosts: 484Gear list
Like?
Re: Olympus patent for telecentric lens
In reply to SHood, 11 months ago

SHood wrote:

You can see from this patent that Olympus was looking at doing a 15mm f2 telecentric lens. I doubt we will see this now but we may see other designs come to fruition.

http://www.43rumors.com/olympus-15mm-f2-0-patent/

...

I'm not clear why the patent depicts a particularly telecentric design. The drawing shows the sensor to be somewhat larger than the exit pupil; as pointed out in this thread a larger exit pupil would be a necessary (though not sufficient) condition for a completely telecentric lens design.

It does appear to be a retrofocus (inverted telephoto) type of design; those are more likely to achieve long spacing between lens and image plane, and thus tend to have more perpendicular incidence on the sensor.

It is the near-perpendicular incidence, not so much the other useful attributes of telecentric lenses, that was the primary benefit of Olympus' Four Thirds system emphasis on "designed for digital" lenses. However, the problems associated with off-axis incidence have gotten much better since the beginning of Four Thirds, and of course the near-telecentric requirement plus the mirror-compatible spacing requirement kept the lenses from being as small as we see today with M43.

Most digital sensors today still have some issue, though not as much, with extremely off-axis image rays. I think the M43 lenses strike the right compromise for now; Four Thirds was the right spec at that time. M43 also is more cognizant of software correction methods which are an essential  and beneficial component of modern camera/lens systems.

In the future, when sensors may become nearly as tolerant of off-axis rays as film emulsion is, then the right compromise might be in the direction of high quality but very compact lens designs like many Leica RF lens designs. However, there are other issues with those aside from the angle - they are not particularly designed for focusing by fast and light AF motors; they aren't necessarily suitable for OIS implementation; they may be extra-sensitive to production mechanical tolerances.

In my view, though it is interesting to track and understand the design approaches, the lenses and cameras should be judged on what performance they deliver, at what cost and with what covenience and flexibility in use. Telecentricity is good to know about but should not be a particular "goal" of most lens buyers.

-- hide signature --

JoelH

 Joel Halbert's gear list:Joel Halbert's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LF1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G3 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Steve_
Senior MemberPosts: 2,046Gear list
Like?
Re: Thanks for the info ...
In reply to alatchin, 11 months ago

I am not blaming anyone. It is a fact. Another fact is the 7-14 olympus lens doesnt exhibit the same flare.

But the point was, if you'll remember, was the size of the lenses. A 7-14 Oly is huge compared to the Panny 7-14. I'm not sure where or why you decided I said anything regarding the optical merits. I guess just to argue.

I dont care for the brand bashing, I am simply stating that the smaller lenses, while being perfectly good lenses, are not necessarily the equal of their larger cousins.

No one ever said they did. But at least you've admitted the size disparity that was my original point.

 Steve_'s gear list:Steve_'s gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH Panasonic Leica Summilux DG 25mm F1.4 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm 1:1.8 +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Steve_
Senior MemberPosts: 2,046Gear list
Like?
Re: Thanks for the info ...
In reply to micksh6, 11 months ago

You probably need to read Metabones Speedbooster adapter white paper. It explains why rear mounted wide-angle converter can improve sharpness.

No chance they have a very vested interest in promoting that impression, I suppose.

 Steve_'s gear list:Steve_'s gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH Panasonic Leica Summilux DG 25mm F1.4 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm 1:1.8 +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Steve_
Senior MemberPosts: 2,046Gear list
Like?
Re: Thanks for the info ...
In reply to alatchin, 11 months ago

I am not sure they were too large for the market. The 12-60 and 50-200, 50mm macro 35mm macro, 9-19 etc etc etc were all well sized well specc'ed lenses for a good price. Bringing up the 300mm f2.8 is like me bringing up the sigma 150-500 f2.8 FF lens

Well sized compared to what? Certainly not the sensor, or m43 lenses. And that was the only point. These are big lenses, and their size in addition to the equally large bodies was doomed given the sensor size disadvantage they saddled on prospective adopters.

 Steve_'s gear list:Steve_'s gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH Panasonic Leica Summilux DG 25mm F1.4 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm 1:1.8 +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
zkz5
Contributing MemberPosts: 662Gear list
Like?
Re: focus breathing?
In reply to Tom Axford, 11 months ago

I see. Thanks.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
bobn2
Forum ProPosts: 30,056
Like?
Re: Thanks for the info ...
In reply to Steve_, 11 months ago

Steve_ wrote:

You probably need to read Metabones Speedbooster adapter white paper. It explains why rear mounted wide-angle converter can improve sharpness.

No chance they have a very vested interest in promoting that impression, I suppose.

That white paper is pretty straight forward, BTW. Its author posts on these forums as 'Brian'. I don't like his political opinions, but his optics seem fine (as you'd expect fro someone who could design such a thing). The point about it is that a focal reducer compresses the output image, from the lens, so each feature in that image becomes half the size. That means in theory its resolution expressed as lines per millimetre will increase by the shrink factor. In practice, a little less, due to the aberrations in the reducer. Of course the resolution in terms of lines per picture height will stay the same/reduce a little.

A built in reducer can do a better job, because instead of adding its own aberrations it can be designed to make some correction to the lens in front, being designed as part of it.

-- hide signature --

Bob

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
alatchin
Contributing MemberPosts: 759Gear list
Like?
Re: Thanks for the info ...
In reply to Steve_, 10 months ago

Steve_ wrote:

I am not blaming anyone. It is a fact. Another fact is the 7-14 olympus lens doesnt exhibit the same flare.

But the point was, if you'll remember, was the size of the lenses. A 7-14 Oly is huge compared to the Panny 7-14. I'm not sure where or why you decided I said anything regarding the optical merits. I guess just to argue.

Not at all. However you are offering comparisons with very little explanation as to why one is larger than the other. And you are right, the Olympus is a very large lens. m43rds has definately allowed smaller wides.

I dont care for the brand bashing, I am simply stating that the smaller lenses, while being perfectly good lenses, are not necessarily the equal of their larger cousins.

No one ever said they did. But at least you've admitted the size disparity that was my original point.

I dont dispute the size difference, only showing that there are reasons.

-- hide signature --

“You don’t take a photograph, you make it.” -Ansel Adams
blog.alatchinphotography(dot)com

 alatchin's gear list:alatchin's gear list
Olympus E-3 Olympus PEN E-P2 Olympus PEN E-PL2 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus PEN E-PL5 +20 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Anders W
Forum ProPosts: 18,016Gear list
Like?
Re: Thanks for the info ...
In reply to alatchin, 10 months ago

alatchin wrote:

exdeejjjaaaa wrote:

alatchin wrote:

Also the Olympus seems to have little to no issues unlike the Panasonic lens which has had a number o fhtreads about purple flare?

that was an issue w/ Olympus design IR/UV cut filtering in sensor assembly - letting too much close to UV spectrum through, not Panasonic fault in lens design... so put the blame where it belongs

I am not blaming anyone. It is a fact. Another fact is the 7-14 olympus lens doesnt exhibit the same flare.

I dont care for the brand bashing, I am simply stating that the smaller lenses, while being perfectly good lenses, are not necessarily the equal of their larger cousins.

The point here is that the purple flare with the Pany 7-14 has nothing whatsoever to do with the size of the lens or with any other factor generally distinguishing MFT from FT lenses. As I pointed out in a prior reply to you, it is a matter of the choice of antireflective coatings (by Panasonic) along with the choice of on-sensor UV filter (by Olympus). Note that the problem does not appear if you put the Pany 7-14 on a Pany body. It occurs only when using this Pany lens on an Oly body as a result of insufficient coordination between the two companies when it comes to on-sensor UV filtering.

 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
alatchin
Contributing MemberPosts: 759Gear list
Like?
Re: Thanks for the info ...
In reply to Steve_, 10 months ago

Steve_ wrote:

I am not sure they were too large for the market. The 12-60 and 50-200, 50mm macro 35mm macro, 9-19 etc etc etc were all well sized well specc'ed lenses for a good price. Bringing up the 300mm f2.8 is like me bringing up the sigma 150-500 f2.8 FF lens

Well sized compared to what? Certainly not the sensor, or m43 lenses. And that was the only point. These are big lenses, and their size in addition to the equally large bodies was doomed given the sensor size disadvantage they saddled on prospective adopters.

Nothing is saddled on anyone. People chose the format or didn't. The lenses I listed are excellent value for money, great performers and for all accounts sold well (as they are mentioned all the time by users).

They were well sized and specced compared to everything on the market. You opinion may differ.

-- hide signature --

“You don’t take a photograph, you make it.” -Ansel Adams
blog.alatchinphotography(dot)com

 alatchin's gear list:alatchin's gear list
Olympus E-3 Olympus PEN E-P2 Olympus PEN E-PL2 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus PEN E-PL5 +20 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads