Microsoft will kick somebody's butt for that.
dzukela: F3.5-6.5 even canon cant do this
Yes they can - how f/6.9 over a tiny sensor sounds? ;)
peevee1: f/3.9 at best. Still useless. Somebody please challenge 2 y/o TG-1 already!
Same lens as the Oly, but much slower operation and much shorter battery life. And worse underwater color balance. I want better, not worse (or same thing like TG-2).Even the same lens, but 1/1.7" 12-mpix sensor from Stylus 1 in multi-aspect mode (so 16:9 would go much wider and about a stop of low-light performance added), TruePic VII processor from E-M1/E-M10, 5-axis stabilization (or even 3-axis from Stylus 1), faster, lower-power A-GPS module with GLONASS (from any cellphone), brighter RGBW LCD - and I will be a happy camper and preorder today. Even for $100 more than TG-2, I promise.If it will take the same battery from E-M5/E-M1 (and have even longer battery life as a consequence), I would be ecstatic.
wolfie: More of same old same old - periscope lens and teeny weeny sensor= pathetic image quality. Is no one ever going to give us something better?
Oly gave much better TG-1 almost 2 years ago. At least the lens is f/2. AW1 with bigger sensor but f/3.5 is not better, just much bigger.
stevez: Very excited about the 300mm. I've been using my 300F4 Nikon on my OMD bodies and loving everything about it except the MF. This lens will complete my MFT system and I can finally dump my Nikon bodies and Nikkor 600mm. A 1.4x tele converter would be really nice. I'll have to think about the 7-14 though as I love the performance and size of the 9-18.
About that 1.4x tele... it is not a DSLR with OVF which has to have optical teleconverters for preview and AF. Here is the trick with OM-D: chose 3:4 (not 4:3) aspect ratio, turn camera 90 degrees... and voila, you have 1.33x teleconverter with full screen preview. Sharpness will be slightly lower, 9mpix instead of 16, but the extra 7 thrown out will be from the least sharp periphery, and optical teleconverters reduce sharpness anyway. And as a bonus, RAWs will still contain full 16 mpix for more precise cropping later.I am sure even higher-res m43 bodies will come as soon as next year. Maybe even by Photokina.
SteB: Wonderful. I waited a long time for such a lens to show up for 4/3. I think it could make m4/3 the go to system for a lot of nature photographers. A 300mm f4 on a crop sensor is probably the most versatile lens for a nature photographer. It is the sweet spot between portability, performance and reach. However, Olympus do really need to produce matching 1.4x and 2.0x converters to go with this, especially the 1.4x converter.
Yeah, they don't really need 2x converter if both 40-150/2.8 and 300/4 are offered. It will make 300/5.6 out of 150/2.8 - why, just buy 300/4 or Panasonic 100-300/4-5.6.Even 1.4... it is not a DSLR with OVF which has to have optical teleconverters for preview and AF. Here is the trick with OM-D: chose 3:4 (not 4:3) aspect ratio, turn camera 90 degrees... and voila, you have 1.33x teleconverter with full screen preview. Sharpness will be lightly lower, 9mpix instead of 16, but the extra 7 thrown out will be from the least sharp periphery, and optical teleconverters reduce sharpness anyway. And as a bonus, RAWs will still contain full 16 mpix for more precise cropping later.
ginsbu: Given that Panasonic already has the 7-14mm range covered with a fine lens (albeit at f/4), I was hoping Olympus would choose a different range for their ultrawide. 8-17mm is a very versatile range that could accommodate filter threads. I would have been particularly interested in a 9-20mm f/2.8 myself.
Hopefully at least a 1.4x TC will be coming to pair with the 300mm f/4 and 40-150mm f/2.8 zoom.
I agree, 9-20mm f/2.8 could have been my kit lens (if weather-sealed). ;)But, 7mm had to be properly covered before strange ranges are introduced. Besides, Oly already has 9-18, just slow (but very small).
kimchiflower: Aside from weather sealing, can someone tell me the benefit of this lens' specs over the Panny 7-14?
The Olly is a stop faster, but why not just bump up the ISO a stop or utilise the extra stops available with IBIS? You can forget about bokeh at this FOV, and shake is less pronounced at wide-angle too.
This is going to be larger, heavier, and pricier. I'd prefer a small, cheap, weather sealed ultra-WA prime (8 or 9mm f3.5?) to take out along with the 12-40 to keep the weight down
You can bump up ISO anyway, and still be a stop faster. Or not bump it up, and have cleaner picture. And AF in low light is going to faster - it's not like the noisy high-ISO signal is of any use either for OSPDAF or CDAF. And your EVF/display picture is going to be cleaner.Even with Oly's 5-axis IBIS, there are lower limits to shutter speed even with landscapes. Any wind, and even leaves in your landscapes become blurry.
7-14. Wow. I expected 8-16. It's going to be expensive. :( But I already want it anyway.
peevee1: Wow, it is even worse than SL1/100D, which was worse than more than 4 y/o T2i and easily won The Worst DSLR of 2013!
Great, the year just started but we already know the winner of The Worst DSLR of 2014!
First of all, Nikon D3300 was announced this year (Jan 7th), and it is already much better than THIS, so T5 is not the best even so far. I am sure there will be more DSLRs launched this year, and one of them will be the best of them (wasn't D4s as good as promised already?).Meanwhile, T5 will stay the worst. Unless Canon decides to outdo themselves again and throw something out of T5 (is it even possible? it is as basic as they come).
peevee1: Nice lens and sensor size (for multi-aspect ratio shooting). But the body...
I had Canon G before. It had OVF, fully-articulated screen (which could be closed for bag-free storage and transport) and full manual controls. Loved it, still enjoy pictures from it. This is no G.
"what does multi-aspect ratio mean, other than can never fully use the entire imaging area?"
Would you prefer a smaller sensor, so some aspect ratios would have to be smaller than they are? Because that is the only other choice with any given lens. And no, there is no a single aspect ratio which fits all scenes the best.Actually, this sensor does not seem to be MAR enough - unlike Panasonics, it does not have native 16:9 ratio which is very important now for HDTV presentations of landscapes and HD video, makes wide end wider and 2:1 crops good.
Nice lens and sensor size (for multi-aspect ratio shooting). But the body...
It would be great if some trusted camera testing site (wink wink) could verify all those claims of "fastest AF" with independent objective (numerical) testing...
But they'd rather shoot black-and-white resolutions charts in case manufacturers cheat with their megapixel counts (?)...
11 fps with C-AF would be perfect for sports, but Sony APS-C E-mount does not have a single decent sport tele zoom. f/6.3 55-210 and 18-200, nor $1500 FE 70-200/4 need not apply.
People who want THIS should just buy the ancient t2i off ebay, they go for as little as $88 nowadays, and they will get a better camera (bigger viewfinder, much higher screen resolution, faster sequential shooting, ISO12,800, more powerful flash, stereo mic, infrared remote control, 8.1Wh LP-E8 battery instead of 6.36Wh LP-E10...)
Oh good old days when Canon actually tried to design something competitive... They have passed so long ago, but brand name power, totally undeserved today, still survives...
Wow, it is even worse than SL1/100D, which was worse than more than 4 y/o T2i and easily won The Worst DSLR of 2013!
" features the company's familiar 18 megapixel CMOS sensor, DIGIC 4 processor, and 9-point AF system."
T2i goes strong for the 5th year, under 7th name. Innovation Canon style!
f/3.9 at best. Still useless. Somebody please challenge 2 y/o TG-1 already!
peevee1: They should have higher resolution in Green, not in blue. Only about 5% of cones in our eyes are responsive to blue light. We are adopted to see detail in green foliage, not in a blue sky.
The entire development team does not make those decisions. And sometimes (more often than not) decisions are dictated by patent, budget and technological limitations, not by "what is best".
Jogger: Sigma should just adopt the Sony e-mount (its open and free).. makes no sense to have three identical bodies with different fixed lenses.
I am not sure it is free for camera-makers...