 |
Andy Crowe
Lives in
United Kingdom
Joined on
Dec 16, 2006
|
   |
|
Connect with dpreview
|
jaygeephoto: Maybe what's need is a different level of forum. The discussion here often degenerates into schoolyard name calling. The very concept of high end medium format systems seems to be out of the reach of understanding of many who write in here. It's not about pixel count or fast focusing. It would seem to me that what Leica is trying to do here is create an easier to handle medium format system. Just as years ago the Pentax 6X7 offered an alternative to medium format roll-film camera of the time. Whether or not this proves to be a financially successful or accepted venture by Leica is anyone's guess. Having used a medium format system from Mamiya the results are no less than spectacular. Whith that being said, it's an ergonomic nightmare and does not come close to the robustness of say a Canon IDx/Ds or a Nikon D4. I applaud any one who is trying to make this format easier to live with.
Also don't forget the only metric of lens quality you need is "total light gathered"...
panos_m: A question about the price. At 30-35mm and f/1.2 is there anything cheaper independent of format?
If it's possible to adapt M4/3 lenses to Nikon 1 (I don't think any adapters exist) then you could use the various Voigtlander f0.95 lenses.
Benarm: Canon definitely won't like Magic Lantern since they're loosing control over what features are enabled or disabled. The 6D is a great example of how Canon purposely handicaps a camera in multiple ways. The question is whether Canon will attempt to block Magic Lantern by a firmware update or make Magic Lantern really difficult/impossible to implement in future cameras. And of course, they can always sue.
@whtchocla7e A better analogy would be if Toyota sold you a Yaris with an engine that could output up to 150hp but with an engine control unit that limited it to a maximum of 80hp.
BJN: Meh. You get a more compact camera only if you don't use the add-on EVF. If you do, you have a bigger, bulkier package. And you have fiddly caps that need to cover the vulnerable accessory port behind the hotshoe and the protruding connector below the EVF. Unless you never or rarely intend to use an EVF, go for the better integrated E-M5.
"steaming pile" AKA winner of the DPReview best camera of 2012 poll.
Ollie 2: Mmmm.
Focus peaking, wifi, 100ISO. Shame that the excellent styling is so spoiled by the absolutely necessary evf.
Think I'll be sticking with my OM for a while longer.
The E-M6 will probably have all those enhancements too.
rmwpg: I purchase PS so I have it to use on those few occasions I need it. I don't need it terribly often and there are plenty of other options that do what I need to do. I will not subscribe to PS, or any software for that matter. I really like Revel, but I uploaded ALL my photos in the free month and will manage my uploads with the free version. I will not subscribe to that either.
I guess if Adobe actually offered cheap ad-hock day/week access that would probably work well for light users, rather than just the minimum 1 year subscription it currently is.
KBarrett: So he's using one of the most hotly sought-after lenses in large format photography, which can project an image to cover a 5x5" area, and acts like a 50mm f/0.7 in terms of depth of field for that format, and he's using it on one of the smallest image sensors that can accept a third-party lens, essentially wasting 98.5% of it's coverage. That's not resurrection, that's condemnation.
Using the ground glass trick is the only way you're going to be able to use that lens's full imaging circle digitally (and it's actually quite a clever solution), even medium format sensors are nowhere near 5x5".
Lukino: Dear DPReview,
please stop posting this garbage. It is not worth the bandwidth it waste.
"I don't like it so therefore you shouldn't like it either"
Micromegas777: 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.
Abusing your camera enough to break your tilt screen off would probably do a fair bit of damage to a regular fixed screen.
MrTaikitso: Ooooh! DPreview featuring rumours and leaks now! Hmm, interesting.
NDAs don't stop DPR from linking to rumours on other sites, they've done it several times before.
steelhead3: looks like a nex clone with a smaller sensor, sort of like a pentax Q
Looks more like the E-P1, which pre-dates the NEX system by a year. I suppose you could say the NEXs are just Pen clones with slightly larger sensors.
Teru Rinshou: Just my luck. I was holding off on getting the E-PL5 because of the lack of a built-in flash but I finally caved in and bought one 2 months ago. And now here comes the E-P5 with built-in flash and wi-fi...
At least you've saved money as the E-P series is more expensive than the E-PL series.
rocklobster: Pity that there is a pop-up flash where an EVF should go. But I suppose that if you really want an EVF then you should buy an E-M5 and anyway I prefer the ergonomics of the E-M5 with the two control dials that readily fall to the thumb and forefinger of my (albeit) small hand.
Also, I would hope that the in-built flash performs better than the clip-on 'kit' flash.
Cheers
I use the built-in flash (in bounce mode) on my GX1 a hell of a lot more than I'd use a built-in EVF. Not having a bouncable flash built in is now a deal-breaker for me.
zinedi: External EVF in the middle only, for extra money? Forget it. No built-in VF - no camera for enthusiasts and advanced photographers.
Well get an OMD then.
MrTaikitso: Ooooh! DPreview featuring rumours and leaks now! Hmm, interesting.
Of course they've probably had one to play with under an NDA for a while now ;)
io_bg: Should've been at least a stop faster...
They've gone for a stop or two less price instead.
cprevost: They will sell tons of these. Nothing else like it close to this price range. Hoping it goes down just a bit in price when it actually hits the street. If it's as good optically as the other two they'll have a hit. For many of us 60mm on micro four thirds is a focal length that doesn't get a ton of use so paying hefty prices for one doesn't make sense. Hoping it makes a fine portrait lens.
I love the depth of field and subject isolation I can get on my oly 45mm. How would this lens compare? I know it doesn't open as wide but would the focal length make up the difference?
@Jun2, but most of the "best" FF portrait lenses are 85-90mm, which is exactly the same equivalent focal length as the Oly 45mm.
Anepo: Anyone else here that hates phone manufacturers calling the led LIGHT "led flash" ?
It's used as the camera's flash so why not call it what it does?
mino21: "Maximum magnifications in image playback show pixelated output" is a negative? I think it is positive. For example, see the results from Panasonic cameras, where image playback is very badly interpolated. There is no way how to see whether the image is blurred or not.
They mean that when fully zoomed in it still only shows a low resolution image blown up, which is a negative compared to cameras which can show a full 1:1 zoom.
peevee1: So much lighter... and even a little faster... now they can compete with Oly 14-150. But it should have been 11 or at least 12 at the wide end.
Tamron 14-150 will have a hard time on the market now. :( I hope this will not discourage Tamron from developing further m43 lenses. But again, on 4/3 sensors, 14mm is not nearly wide enough.
MPA1 by definition anything between 35mm and 24mm equiv is wide angle, below 24mm is ultrawide. (An ultra wide-angle lens is a lens whose focal length is shorter than the short side of film or sensor).