Hongze: What the heck is "light gathering capability"? I am so confused by the formula someone come up with - "42.5/1.2 = 85/2.4 = 35.4mm". Is a 1.2 lens 1.2 regardless of their focal length? If two lenses can project the same amount of light to per square inch/cm of sensor, do they have the same "light gathering capability"?
Please help me to make sense the "42.5/1.2 = 85/2.4".
Some people prefer to argue about things OTHER than making pictures.
They will quote technically correct "facts' until the cows come home but rarely actually shoot a picture.
We used to call them "gear-heads". Like obsessive hi fi buffs who rarely listened to an album all the way through.
Today there are other names for such OCD people, measurebator for instance - and other even less flattering terms.
On yeah, pics are at http://photohounds.smugmug..com (or in sig)
Wanting suggestions for side by side comparisons on the EM1 and EM5.
I'll be interested in this lens, but would want to do quite a bit of shooting with one before booting the Zuiko 45mm-f/1.8. It and the 75mm-f/1.8 perform very well, as does the new 12-40mm-f/2.8 zoom.
Interesting that this issue should be 'discovered' as micro four thirds began gaining more popularity.
The moving mass of a mirror (and sub-mirror) is MUCH heavier than a shutter and will shake the camera more, yet no one sees that as a "problem".
In the 'film days', one had to learn how to hold a camera and gently massage the shutter release for sharp pictures. Many 35mm camera makers added mirror lock up to their better models - always to "reduce camera shake". Sometimes I managed a hand-held shot with a 300mm lens at 1/8th second if the subject also remained still.
Most of the pics of dimly-lit alcoves in this gallery were taken at speeds down to 1/5th hand held
I looked at thousands of my other images, and found ZERO evidence of this "problem".
Simple solution: be still while shooting and don't blame something else.
JDThomas: I'm pretty sure if Sigma made an 18-300 f/0.95 lens that was 3 inches long was built out of unobtanium, weighed 3 grams, nailed focus on every shot, was sharp at all focal lengths across the frame and cost $35, that 75% of the people here would STILL find something to complain about.
Kay Fisher: AEB QuestionCan you do AEB with the 2 second self timer?This can't be done on the M5. How about the new M1?
I've never thought of that. I usually use a wire release - I think it gives more control
Have you tried using it with Burst mode?It does one "set" while you hold down the remote release, and stops when the exposure set is done.
That's useful - you don't even have to count exposures!
Ah, amnother poster who "thinks" less glass/metal means the lens is "worth" less.They'll buy an f150 truck rather than a Ferrari because more metal for the money is "better".Making excellent small things is harder and costs MORE, not less.
Some people appreciate the price of everything and the value of nothing.
More compact cameras often translate into more/better photo opportunities.
Agree, Nuno, I don't hang around the CaNikon forums either. Too busy enjoying my camera.
These cross brand whiners are a very sad lot and it must be very depressing in CaNikon land for them to enjoy spending so much time here ....
photohounds: People who flaccidly try to equate amount of materials used in a lens to its price, are the same "thinkers" who think a Ferrrari should cost the same as an-150 truck.After all the F-150 has MORE materials in it - so it is "better", right?
FACT is, the smaller you make something excellent, the MORE it costs (almost universally).
The f 0.95 DOF tirade is also getting stale (well it was a year ago).I shot a theatre production this week, no DOF "issues" as imagined by pixel-peeping Bricks 'n' bazookas fans - none at all ...
To judge pictures instead of uninformed opinion:
At the link, select "performing arts", and "footloose", basically unprocessed except for density and a little NR ands I turn the camera NR off (better when there is smoke in the image).
Or here ...http://photohounds.smugmug.com/Performing-arts/Footloose-Supa
Everything is in focus? http://photohounds.smugmug.com/Performing-arts/Footloose-Supa - you mean there?
On a 4" phone screen perhaps? Of course, many are "crew cuts", as it is politically correct to get an image of everyone or "chance shots" as sometimes that is all you get. The detail in the originals, is excellent considering the light.
I don't use an 85/1.2 any more. Too heavy, too unwieldy to get unusual angle shots and quite soft until about 2.8, so in effect isn't really 'faster' at all. There's also the little matter of 1-1/3 stops lower shutter speeds = more motion blur.
Overall the EM-5 is a great tool for many jobs. It is also great for inexperienced models - so much less intimidating that I shoot it in preference most times. Being compact is often a boon.
Looking seriously at EM-1
G Davidson: Just looking at the extreme amount of comments is telling. It seems there is a strong interest in m4/3, even if the time when just the right model to really take off is still to come.
One thing holding them back is the lack of pro use to aspire to. To my mind, with all the latest models offer, all they need are some very bright (f0.95-1.2), autofocusing affordable primes and there will be no need for using a larger format.
Envy - We don't Need Arnold Schwarzenegger to carry our gear, and you really have to pixel peep to see much difference - or make billboard print s from one image ....
People who flaccidly try to equate amount of materials used in a lens to its price, are the same "thinkers" who think a Ferrrari should cost the same as an-150 truck.After all the F-150 has MORE materials in it - so it is "better", right?
Haider: Hmmm m4/3rds tend to be software corrected lens. Will it be up to f2.8-3.5 11-22mm, 14-54mm, 50-200mm Zuiko Digital. In three lens you've got it covered in terms of quality and coverage chuck in Pany Leica 25mm f1.4... 12-60mm SWD distortion at 12mm put me off...
Only the cheap lenses show evidence of software correction...
Hmm time for a little logic, instead of clucking ... The 'evidence' above proves nothing more than they might use similar software to design lenses ... would that surprise anyone?
IF Sigma DID make this lens, it would cover APSC - DOES IT? I doubt it.
Of course, what the article suggests DOES happen.While watching promo Video on the Tokina factory, my then boss (fluent in Japanese), reads the writing on the 35-105 boxes as they whizz past on a conveyor belt. Some had : Ship to Nippon Kogaku with an address
MORE IMPORTANTLY:For some results with the 75/1.8 (and 45/1.8), look here: http://photohounds.smugmug.com/Performing-arts
or at the link in my signature below.Select Browse and then Performing Arts.
Some of the shots were taken in such DIM light that an OVF would be utterly useless. I certainly couldn't see properly and still I shot.
The "BIG camera" boys with their 2.8 bazookas were tripod/mono-pod bound. I was able to hand hold very easily ... and I got the shots.
slrgear . com reviewed it ... as have a few other sites.
Suffice it to say it is an incredible lens. I am constantly amazed at the detail is captures - even without a billion marketing pixels ...
If this focal length suits you (tight face shots and landscape details, you'll appreciate it. Like the 45 and 12 it comes in black, too now.
BoFiS: Ugh, STOP IT, basically everything 4.3" and above is too big to hold and use in one hand...our hands have not grown in the last couple of years, why have our phones?! Also all that extra space is silly if you're just going to fill half the home screen with an even-larger clock/weather widget.
People seem to forget we spend AT LEAST 10x as much TIME looking looking at it - (say; text, email or web browsing) than you do with the phone to your ear.
Post 2010, these things are mostly used as computers that also make calls, NOT the other way around.
Little phones are quite useless unless you use a small pocket as the "measure of importance" to suit a justification (or marketing) argument.
Steven Rounds: As a Note 2 user, I know that the 5.5-inch screen on the Note 2 already has 720P (1280x720). Samsung is not going to put less than 720P on their bigger 5.8-inch screen. I'd bet that either or both of the new models will be 1920x1080.
hopefully they don't have to subsidies THESE phones as happens in US and AUS until now ..
rramjit: I have the Note II and it is an amazing device. I normally would want to root my phone but this phone just works great with no issues...ok well, I have a pet peeve with the GPS...I feel that the GPS radio is a little weak sometimes...The camera is great and a joy to edit photos on, for posting to social networks.SIZE: I doubt whether I could go to a small phone/phablet now. I love to read newspapers, magazines, watch videos on it. This is the sweet spot...anything bigger is not going to work in the U.S. market.
I have the note 2 and use it for that.
The 6.3 while a useful size, as you say needs a 400PPI screen to interest me.
Looks like Note 3 will have 6" and 400+PPI. In September.
FRANCISCO ARAGAO: Wow, Apple "buying" patents!Now this is new!
iNaccurate, unless you count rectangles with rounded corners and THAT will soon be watered down, or maybe even overturned ....
Samsung buy (and have) real patents.
bryanbrun: You don't buy this lense over the Panny 20mm b/c it focuses faster and silently, you buy it b/c the bokeh is so much better than the Panny 20mm.
The Panny 20mm suffers from harsh pancake bokeh.
The Oly 12mm with the same build and features is one of the top selling lenses on amazon for CSC. Oly is duplicating that approach.
I\ mulling over this lens and the 17/1.7 Panasonic 20 and their 25/1.4.
If this lens is near as sharp as my 45/1.8, 75/1.8, or exceeds my 12/3, the decision's already made.
hindesite: The Macro looks great!
Is manual focus only by wire, or coupled directly to the focus ring?
Wire's just fine for accuracy, you can hear the 'clicks' if you listen carefully and the graduations are so tiny.
AF focusses in steps in every system I've seen, Oly just couple the motor that does the AF to the ring.
To say you can do finer is paranoia and not very likely because FBW is geared down, you can make VERY fine adjustments.
Don't worry 'how' just shoot ...
Great ideas ...
You seem to have missed the fact that many Android tablets have removable plug-in storage and USB slots.
These features effectively make for massive storage using very little space.
That new Samsung 11.8" P-10 tablet might be perfect - the narrow bezel means ii will probably store in a small space while offering a larger retina screen.
Less zooming and something like that might offer the best of both worlds!
marike6: In the Nikon 1 review, DPR was heavily critical of the lack of external controls. In this EOS-M Preview, the same lack of external buttons is described more as a feature, not a bug because of the "target audience" caveat. Clearly a GF3 is not as nice to use as a GF1 because of the touch screen, yet it's implied in this EOS-M preview that the touch screen can replace mode dials and ISO buttons. Why is it not OK for the Nikon 1 to remove external controls (Nikon was very clear about the target audience for the Nikon 1) yet perfectly fine for the EOS-M?
OMD EM-5 has both external controls AND touch screen :) This is entry not state of the art.
Lenses - will they match zuikos? I doubt it - at least for a few years ...
sj2: Lots of opinions and lots of people seem to think a camera should be everything to all people. No one camera will ever do that. It is a tool with specific application in mind.
To my mind, unless you are new in the market and have no lens/system, comparison with other brands makes little sense. I have been down the path of owing two systems and did not work.
Lenses are the real investment so to me, makes sense to build a good lens line-up that you enjoy working with. Then fit bodies around your lenses. And that what I like about this little fella.
I can pack it in my bag with the primary Canon dSLR body and lens and when I don't want to lug around the primary body, this little guy comes out and does the job.
Going to sell my m4/3 body and lens now. m4/3 vendors have simply wasted too much time with mediocre lens. If you are new buyer with no existing setup then Sony and Pentax seem like good alternatives except Sony's lack of lens. Nikon with a sub-APSC is a competition?
You haven't tried tyhe 12/2 45/1.8 and 75/1.8. Kills any lens canon will be likely to put on this type of body for 3 years. Wanna wait that long?
Oh yes a little thing called quality ... not sure if that interests you.
Compare this ...http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1443/cat/14to this ... http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/150/cat/10
the 1.2 is even SOFTER