For a lot of people, default cloud storage space is gonna be lesser than local storage... Basically for anyone that is already using their Google/Dropbox account and is on a free tier.
Michael Foran: Sony continues to screw up with the Play Apps. Why not open the API to third party developers? Why do we have to jailbreak our cameras to sneak these apps in? Even if Sony made some astounding Play Apps, which they DON'T, there is always someone out there who will need something or invent something Sony doesn't provide. I like my A7ii, and all the Sony cameras I have had over the years, but their Play Apps have continued to be a sore spot. The wasted potential here is very frustrating.
That's the kind of backwards thinking older players in the market would adopt IMO... Sony's done an incredible job of iterating IMO, specifically with hardware improvements you can't really match in software, and at a pretty quick pace on the FF side (maybe less so on APS-C, but the a6300 is still a big hardware leap forth when it did arrive). They really shouldn't have that kinda fear, if anything, a few killer apps will only expand the market and create more buzz.
El Jeffe: Looks lovely but sadly I don't think this will fit a GX85 with a tripod plate mounted. The lens barrel will extend too far past the bottom edge of the body.
There's also a ladder shaped spacer from Nikon (and another from a brand I'm forgetting) that would work as a last resort, I had them bookmarked before I started to find plenty of tiny plates that'll work in just about any situation.
Seriously have you seen the GM1? I don't think you need a plate as tiny as the Jobu I've used on that body (the smallest they make), but that plate essentially has no front/back edge, it's like a C shape (pointing down).
It's a mess to drop links and model numbers on the comments tho so lemme know if you need any extra info, happy to help.
It's not a problem, trust me, the E-M5 II has a tripod socket that's sticking out the front edge as well and I have several plates that still fit with plenty of clearance while using even larger lenses. Some of the plates from the brands I mentioned also allow you to slide the plate back off center from the tripod thread, Desmond also has some that have like no edge lip whatsoever.
Like I said, if you hit me up with a PM I can help ya out with test-fit photos with different lenses etc. The tripod socket on the GX85 might stick out ever so slightly more than my OM-D's but we've got way larger lenses than the 12mm in the house too. I did get a RRS L/grip for my E-M5 II, even tho I found it rather pricey and i don't agree with their politics, but this was better designed than anything else out there as far as not interfering with the flip out screen.
I also liked that the grip part on the RRS L plate could be removed without a remaining protrusion. If I could've found a grip-less L plate (that was still custom made for the body) or the screen wasn't an issue (wouldn't be on the GX85 since it's a tilty) I would've gone with a much cheaper Chinese one off Amazon/eBay... Plenty of em are really well built, RRS's clever design earned them my $ tho (begrudgingly).
Terry Breedlove: I have zero use for a 12 mm 1.4 because I want more area in focus not less when shooting a wide angle lens. However I am glad to see Panasonic and Olympus giving more options even if I would never buy this one lens. More is always better :)
Hah, and your second comment just snuck in as i wrote mine, it's all good!
Yes Terry, maybe you should pay more attention... :p Sorry maybe i should've done the whole @ thing but I figured it'd be clear I was commenting on Lassoni's comment... You can't reply to sub replies here, I agree with your sentiment tho.
n3eg: So far, I haven't seen a camera that didn't have some sort of wifi limitation. Are there any that show up as a network file server?
Mind you, I still prefer Panasonic's Wi-Fi implementation, specially when the body has NFC... But that one feature on Oly bodies stuck out to me from the start as an advantage.
Olympus bodies do, it's a pseudo guest mode, you can put the body's IP in your browser and just download sans app... I'm not sure if it actually works when you have it on a network tho, but it's still convenient for direct connections when the phone or device you're sharing with (someone else's presumably) doesn't have the app installed.
I just don't understand why Nikon went with this convoluted Wi-Fi implementation, it sounds like the engineers working on it simply didn't finish (even ignoring the iOS side of the equation). BT LE should be like NFC, an OPTION to initiate a faster Wi-Fi transfer, not an outright replacement or alternative; it's just the obvious way of implementing if you know anything about the standards and specially if you have Wi-Fi on board anyway.
Osa25: The hot trend now is they all want to bleed you dry of data and metadata. And then sell it. Connectivity via apps is almost entirely for that purpose. But why should anyone be required to route their images via a camera maker's app and servers, just in order to be able to use wifi data transfer? Its insane...
This is a common problem in the consumer electronics industry and also among other digicam manufacturers like for example Panasonic.
Your comment is not very accurate, AFAIK no one forces you to route images thru anywhere... Almost all, if not all, Wi-Fi enabled cameras allow you to transfer directly to ur mobile device, which is what most people would prefer anyway since it's quicker to upload them elsewhere from the mobile apps you're accustomed to using. I've got three Panasonic bodies and one Oly in this household that work like this btw.
Even when they do force you to go thru their servers, in the case of direct upload to social media etc, it's not to suck down metadata (Nikon and Panasonic are not Google, they're not in the info stockpiling business)... It's because of lazy programming really. It's much easier for them to do it that way and handle communication with Google/FB's ever changing APIs on their back end than it is for them to build (and keep updated) a more complex process within the camera.
Hejnar makes some nice mini plates too btw, along with a wide variety of other tripod adapting gear like rails and whatnot.
(unknown member): Hate the price but this lens will be joining my kit as soon as it arrives. Yes it's huge and expensive, and I own and love the Oly 12mm f2. But at another focal length, 42.5mm, I have both the f1.2 and f1.7. The look of images shot at f1.2 is beautiful, it's my standard lens for nightclub or recording shoots, where there's nothing BUT distracting backgrounds and low light. The f1.7, though, is in my every day bag because it's small, light, and at f2 or f2.8, every bit as sharp as the f1.2. When I got the f1.7, it was to be part of my every day small camera four primes kit, and if I thought the difference wasn't much to the f1.2, I would sell the f1.2. I've not sold it...
Wish that they'd done an f1.2 (or f1.4, I suspect getting to f1.2 would be absurdly heavy and large) at the 35mm equivalent focal length, though. That and 85mm equivalent are my two most frequently used work lenses. 24mm equivalent is a close third, though.
I'd be all over a 17mm or 18mm, even at $1,300, hell even at $1,500... Hopefully Olympus is listening, although it'd fit in either's lineup.
TTLstalker: Don't understand the need for such a fast wide angle lens. Could have just given me a 12mm F2.8 with excellent performance at a much cheaper price.
Also the MF Samyang 12mm f2, a little larger than the Oly but way cheaper... There's already plenty of budget options.
Favorable Exponynt: Oh well... 1.4 http://petapixel.com/2014/02/21/olympus-patents-impressive-12mm-and-14mm-f1-0-lenses/
I wouldn't mind another 20mm either... Just something in that range! I just want a weather sealed prime, and if I'm gonna get one at a premium it might as well be at my most used FL, and that just happens to be what's now probably the weakest point in the M4/3 lens lineup (if you could call it that, bit of a stretch since it's pretty strong overall).
Marksphoto: so if it's equivalent to 24 mm on full frame, what does that make the f-stops equivalent to 3.5?
villagranvicent: I wonder what stops Leica to make some nice m43 bodies to use with these lenses?
Why would they? It's their glass people covet, not their antiquated bodies; and they don't make these lenses anyway, they collaborate in design with Panasonic at best but they're made in Japan by Panny... Leica doesn't make sensors either, so besides making a simplified/overpriced body for purists there'd be little point in making a M4/3 body that would just trade on their name. Then again, you could say the same of the rebranded Panasonic P&S cameras they do sell so what do I know...
PerL: OK - so I found the comparison I was after. This Pana 12 1.4 weighs 355g and costs 1300 dollars.The eqv Canon 24 2.8 for FF weighs 281g and costs 550 dollars. (B&H)The much faster eqv Nikon 24 1.8 for FF weighs 355g and costs 700 dollars.Fast primes simply seems to be weak point for small formats, and you have to pay a significant extra cost if you want to go there. And there is no size advantage - rather the opposite - despite the small sensor.
Cherry picking one of the more overpriced bodies with one of the newer/priciest (and somewhat overpriced) lenses makes the argument null... BUT it doesn't change the fact that either might STILL be appealing on it's own for someone already invested in the system. Frankly I think both should be closer to a grand if not exactly that, but I'd drop up to $1,500 for a fast sealed 18mm in an instant too.
Andrew: Aside from the politics of weight and price...what specific kind of shooting would you use this lens for?
A small tracking mount at $300 might make more sense for astro no? Dunno, Scott has far more experience than I ever will. The mount I found is on my wishlist for now, as I already have the 12/2 and my first preference for a fast sealed prime would be 17-18mm.
There's already a small 12mm f2 from Oly if that's what you want, great metal build still... Also somewhat overpriced but not hard to catch it on sale and refurb for substantially less. Failing that there's also a third party 12/2, albeit MF, and the 12-32 pancake isn't so shabby. This f1.4 isn't for you, but other M4/3 users will surely lap it up.
The system's ability to scale large and small is one of it's better assets, don't short change it by calling out what it can't/shouldn't do, embrace the fact that it can even if it's not for you... That core versatility was a big selling point for me.
Lassoni: This is the most useless lens for m43, right after olympus macro 30 3.5 or whatever the new lens is.
Why? Because it creates huge disharmony. This lens has nothing to do with a m43, it's just too big. I can understand 42.5 f1.2 , because it's a portrait lens, there's actual need for wide aperture lenses for portraiture.. but I seriously don't see the need in wider-than-1.8 12mm lens.
You know what would make lots of more sense? A 90 or 100mm macro lens for some insect macro, or a 12mm T-S lens or something. If they want make 12mm prime, they could've kept it 1.8 or 2 , keep it smaller and lighter than Nikon 24 1.8 .. why would you want a FF size prime lens on a m43 ??? Might as well get a Sony a7 at that point imo
As a M4/3 user that appreciates the way the system can scale in either direction, I strongly disagree. Moreover, there's probably still a larger market for a fast weather sealed prime than for a TS lens... You might have a point about longer macros tho.
I can tell you I'll be first in line for an equivalent f1.2 or f1.4 lens at 17mm or 18mm, even tho my kit currently revolves largely around the smallest lenses in the system... I think a lot of people that didn't buy into larger f2.8 zooms, who currently have smaller/slower zooms and/or the cheaper primes, might stretch for something like this.
That being said, $1,300 is pushing it a bit. I'd pay it (for an 18mm), but i dunno if others would. I think closer to $1,000 is more reasonable, all things considered (other systems as well as the price of existing primes).