To stay off DPR as it brings out the worst in me.
Gotta love Olympus. They have so much emotional currency people with all sorts of cameras must weigh in and pass judgement on each and every move they make :)
This is be a fantastic lens, sharp wide open, great colour and contrast, it is TINY, i mean look at it. I will buy it the moment one is available and it will sit in my small shoulder bag with my other body, and 6 lenses. :) I have a lot of uses for this lens both for work and for play.
For all you people claiming 150mm is not portrait... hell even 12mm can be portrait, 1000mm can be portrait. Use your imagination, leave the muslin behind and experiment :)
For all the equivalent lens buyers, not all glass is made the same. A Tokina 70-200 f2.8 is not the same price as a Nikon 70-200 F2.8. A Samyang 85mm f1.4 costs less than a Canon 85mm f1.4 etc etc etc.
While a smaller image circle means smaller lenses, it also requires glass of a higher spec to resolve contrast and detail on a competitive level. A perfect example of this is any 50mm f1.4 stopped to f1.8 will not have the same optical qualities as the 45mm at f1.8.
Equivalence belongs in a science classroom, not in photography. m43rds and 43rds is more than just smaller and lighter (which it is). It is consistent IQ across the frame (unlike many of the cheap lenses compared for FF here) along with excellent lens design for focusing as well.
If you want a cheaper lens, buy a cheaper lens, to all you equivalent people out there... Do you walk into a jeweler and compare a cheap diamond to a flawless one? Quality isnt always determined by measures such as Karat but go beyond.
Kudos for doing something other companies wouldnt. Would have been cooler a bit cheaper though... say.... $4000 and you could have justified the cheaper cost due to the simplified processing and sensor... (even it is was a bit tongue in cheek).
But hey, they may well sell tonnes of these.
really very beautiful images as base ISO, crisp and clean with effortless colour... Once I downres my a850 to see how it looks I may even get one...
brkl: That's pretty remarkable. As good as the best of APS-C it seems.
brkl,That is assuming the light levels were that same for both shots.
dexter007: Wow..superb images...Images are many times better than high end SLR's ... till TSO 6400 superclear pics....after that a little bit of noise....noise is a bit evident at ISO25600...but still pictures are perfectly usable...very nice color reproduction...I love canon colors and Oly is on par with them...They really done a wonderful job with small sensor...love it...the only thing I dont like about the camera is the lack of built-in flash and the very big hump on the top....still it is a gorgeous camera....killer looks with proper controls....
Seems we are commenting on different images
msusic: Hmmm.. samples look pretty great.
What I don't get is why exposure is so different compared to your 5Dmk3 test?
E-M5 ISO2005/8s (so bit over half a second)f/6.3 (so 1 2/3 EV more light than Canon)
However, the exposure on the canon is about 10x as long, yet if one was to stop the E-M5 down to f11, they would only require 2s exposure).
Canon shots are clearly more exposed which helps with the noise levels.
I think this is some sort of portable setup where they do the best they can to try and get comparative samples out as fast as they can.
Probably nothing more to it.
Sosua: Odl, DX has an 85 3.5 and there is a Voigtlander 90mm 3.5 for full frame. But why would you use one when you xould have an 85 1.2/1.4/1.8 for full frame or Dx?
I think you need to take off you rose coloured specs there olyflyer. I bought a D7000 on Friday, returned it on Saturday. For the simple reason, the DX lens selection blows. YOu end up buying bigger more expensive FX lenses to shore it up. And just because there are about 15 middling zooms doesnt make up for the lack of say a 70-200 equivalent, a real DX 35mm equivalent, a real DX 85 or 90 mm portrait prime with some reasonable speed and so on and so on. Just because you can stick on a zoom and "nearly" get there is not the point of performance primes. Just because you can stick on a 50mm and get some pretty average performance and nearly get there doesnt make up for it.
Nikon just doesnt produce a reasonable selection of lenses for DX. I know, I looked at sigma, i look at tamron, i looked at tokina, and what did I see, more middling zooms, overlapping what Nikon themselves offer, a macro or two... But where is the say 60mm f1.8 they could so easily make? Where is the 50-150 f2.8 etc.
An 85 f3.5 is an 130mm f4.5? on FX the 85mm lenses you list are also not the equivalent of a 90mm lens, they are all significantly longer.
A FF body is also very expensive, while there are plenty quality lenses available for FF, there are far fewer available for DX. So why attack the m43rds 45mm f1.8? Why not look at the equivalent lenses for DX, or the lack of them?
EDIT: oh and I dont mean you attacking the 45mm but bradley's ignorant comment.
Bradly clearly doesnt understand. But that is okay brandley, you dont need this camera, in fact, I can assure you it wasnt intended for you.
You are all over the map with your comment, if you are using a 90mm f3.5 you are upping the ISO or increasing shutterspeed. Not everyone wants razor thin DoF, not everyone wants huge clunking cameras, huge clunking lenses, huge clunking file sizes.
People say that FF gives you choices, sure it does, at a size, weight and pricepoint that puts them in a different category of camera. I use my a850 when I want, and I use my Pen cameras when I want... Isnt it nice to have choices?
But nevermind, pray tell what is the 25mm f1.4 equivalent to? It is so interesting reading your comments :) Oh and the 40-150. While you are at it, please show me a 90mm f3.5 lens for FF... Nono please show me the DX 90mm portrait prime that achieves this speed... wait wait, there isnt one. So it looks like m43rds has more choices than Nikon DX, isnt that nice :)
Seriously, if Olympus wants to make an extra buck... Make a lens for Sony :) They made the specs free!
Why was he deducting his business expenses from the post tax amount?
I dont know how much high speed internet costs, but $200 a month? Either way his point is valid, but his numbers are messy. You dont deduct your expenses from your income, you deduct them from your sales (the $50,000), then work out what your your inco,e is and therefore your income taxes.
zwania: No, my vision is pefect. Some of you people need to go down to Target and ask the pharmacist for some http://www.frmpc.com/teknolojiforumlari.htmobjectivity pills. I realize you love your Olys, etc, but there's no way that much noise/washed out contrast could escape your notice. Or could it?
You know what I love? The painted look to the Nikon files. Now i own the D90, a850 and Pen bodies, so i have no dog in this race. But the Nikon isnt perfect, and while it may have an advantage today, a "catchup" in sensor technology will leave it behind in terms of pure sensor performance...
Then you get all the benefits of m43rds:- Five companies currently producing lenses (more to come)- Better DoF control on the m43rds bodies- Large Line-up of lenses that actually exist- Two body manufacturers offering a range of body styles and options- A real hot shoe- Arguably the best video on a DSLR to date
But hey, buy what you like, it is a free world. Everything else is just hot air.
Camp Freddy: Nikon fanboys had better hope spending serious cash on better lenses improves the performance: sharpness, contrast, gradation/tonal depth are all struggeling against the g12 and XZ1. mFT is far better.
Also launching a camera with such poor ISO performance in the ILC sector now is just plain dumb.
But Jorgen,He didnt talk about "serious performance". The m43rds users also can pull out their FF cameras and go-a-shooting when they need to.
The right tool for the right job is exactly what it seems to be, a shifting scale. People are upset because instead of catering to the enthusiast (which most Nikon users here were hoping for) they catered to the consumer.
What does this mean? Well, we will for sure not see a mirrorless APSC from Nikon, as that would mean either using their DX lenses (too big) or creating a new mount (unlikely). So Nikon has stated squarely that they do not believe the mirrorless segment is any better than consumer.
Now the shortcomings of the V1 are the smaller sensor less DoF control, limited MP (important to some), large body and lenses (for a smaller sensor and MP), currently limited lens offering for enthusiasts, odd controls for enthusiast (saw one yesterday).
Compared to all the other cameras in the segment, it is a letdown.
Not bad, except by iso 1600 even in raw you can see the NR smearing away detail.
So, not smaller, lack of lenses, and they nearly manage to equal an older sensor design... For a lot of money...
I am sure people will buy it, I just dont think it is worth it.
Very reminiscent of Nighthawks. Could be called, Nighthawks on the water :)
Every time i click on the link i get a blank review, i then have to click on the EP3 selection where I only have the choice of Jpeg not raw. What am i missing, I have clicked on each comparison page.
@WilljacksThat is exactly what this widget is for. At least we are not painting others with a nasty brush, but enjoying this website for exactly what it was designed for.
The Jpeg at ISO 200 seems OOF (or even motion blur), the fact that the NEX is showing more detail seems to confirm that for me.
Just compare it to the EPL2, the EP2 or the EPL1, i think the shot may have been a bit hurried.