I have 2 VF2 for my EP-3 cameras, but I rarely use them. The touch screen is enough for me, and I'm suspicious about tiltable screens as they easily break off.
I use both an Android phone and a Blackberry. BB used to be at least mechanically solid - not anymore. Some applications stopped functioning, as they aren't supported anymore.Android is in another league. Why on earth should I buy a BB again?
David Hurt: I have older Bogen(Manfrotto tripods) & they work great - about $179.00 invested in the whole thing - legs & a head. No way I would pay $250.00 for tripod legs!!
So far I haven't found a stable full-size tripod that weighs less than one kilo (incl the head), but the Gitzo 00531 (and its successors) with the Arca Swiss P0.For Micro Four Thirds, this solution absolutely suffices. If I need more comfort, I put the Manfrotto 468 on top - smooth & stable camera control, I hardly need to touch the knobs
photohounds: I compared the EM-5 output to my RB76 slides/negs of old. Micro 4/3 leaves it in the dust for all BUT stupidly and unsalable wafer thin DOF. Also film latitude in negs still wins.
Usually you had to stop down RB67 to F8 to get acceptable DOF - more for landscapes (portraits were OK at F4.5).
RB-67 lenses closed down to f/45 when needed, (occasionally).This is why large format cameras can be had for a dime on eBay - no need for dinosaurs any more and 35mm is next. History has proven it, and the oldies whined when roll film went out of fashion as "full" frame adherents do right now.
That 75/1.8 looks brilliant and is available now in OZ. Want to sell some lenses first, though.
u4/3 helps to reduce clutter very well without real (as opposed to imagined) loss in quality.
Every few decades the film (sensor) has halved (with a 1960's blip, rejecting"movie frame' cameras like the old pen range because still film wasn't good enough. Ancient history!
very small numbers of medium format are sold - simply not commercially viable. Look what happened to Hasselblad, now in the hands of some obscure German outfit
MP Burke: Of course it is bigger and (likely to be) much more expensive than the Panasonic 14mm f2.5. I think Schneider have an eye on the users of the AG-AF100 series and possibly also the Sony VG10 video cameras.If the lens can achieve high performance at full aperture without significant vignetting and distortion correction, then it will have advantages over the current m43 wide angle primes that some people may be willing to pay for.m43 owners will have to accept that third party makers will often be making lenses to cover the APS-C image circle. This doesn't make them bad lenses, it will just mean they are likely to be bigger than the native m43 designs. I think it's nice to have the growing choice of prime lenses.
I still use the old FT 1.4/25 Panaleica a lot, as no other MFT lens comes quite close to its performance (that includes the MFT 1.4 25 from Panasonic). The old Schneider field camera lenses are still in use, as their performance is very good. Hence I hope this new line of lenses will provide us with the same level of quality. I'll definitely buy one
Mike Brunette: This is a true game changer, if you're serious about photography & more importantly video this is a killer piece of glass.
Suffice it to say that the super heavyweight 200mm/2.0 lenses that most pros want, yet can't afford is way more expensive (list price $9,500), and harder to transport, not to mention the big canon is almost 1/2 stop slower.
Dimensions = φ60.7 x 51.7mm / φ2.39 X 2.04 in.Weight = 165g / 5.82 oz.
Canon EF 200mm f/2.0
Product Dimensions: 8.2 x 2.4 x 2.4 inches ; 5.6 pounds
The Olympus is about the size and weight of the Canpn's lens hood.
I really like the 45mm Olympus. Still the old FT 25mm Panasonic is the lens I use most of the time. Quality unmatched, IMHOhttps://picasaweb.google.com/110955796927925538104/DompierreMonastereOrthodoxeDeLaTresSainteEtDivineTrinite7August2011?authuser=0&feat=directlink
S.A.: Shouldn't have gotten that number considering the auto focus system/price. Autofocus is fundamental. It should be considered as one of the most important features, just behind image quality. The rest is icing. Especially when you are reviewing a 1300 dollar system. The camera doesn't deserve that number. 81 and gold my azz.
Whatever the qualities of the sensor, the following makes the Olympus EP3 the better camera for me:
1. Touch screen - I used to do a lot of manual focusing with the EP1 (slow AF). With the touch screen, sharpness is where I want it to be. No issue with "camera tends to focus on the background"2. Unmatched lens set-up: the old Panaleica 1.4/25 (my favourite), the 2/50 Oly Macro, the fast and lightweight 1.8/45 Oly, the 7-14 Panasonic and the 100-300 Panasonic. Sony doesn't even come close3. No time for RAW - the Oly jpegs are perfect for me. 4. Cheap replacement batteries which perform like Original Olympus5. The built in flash works nicely at short range, and it can control up to nine flashes remotely. Each group (3 flashes) can be directed separately (stronger/weaker flash - all TTL, of course. No simple slave mode). Use the FL-50, but also the tiny FL-300 is a great help. Very fast and reliable. Sony ?