Zvonko: I just don't understand why any brand would sell a lens which needs tweaks for focus from the moment you buy it. Looks like a FAB lens but as others have said, the focus issues suck.
The way PD-AF as technology works is such that the precision needed to make a lens that always focuses perfectly well at max aperture like at F:1,8 is next to impossible to reach in mass pruduction like most lenses are the results of, so to speak.Even if not mass produced it would still be next to impossible, simply because of the way such AF-systems are desiggned to work.That´s why the need for "after manufacture adjustment" have come into existence, and why it is the chosen way of manufacturers to make their products more usable.
The constantly risen resolution (higher pixel count) of modern cameras made this necessary; had all cameras stopped at fex 6 megapixels these things (micro adjustment of AF) would not have came about.
David Naylor: Wow, this "AF issue" is being blown completely out of proportion. I've had this lens for over a month now and haven't had even the slightest indication that there is anything wrong with the AF. If there is any inconsistency I'd say it is well within the limits of what is normal for any lens using phase-detect focus.
And since the open-loop AF myth has been de-bunked (i.e. PDAF *does* confirm focus after shifting) then a large part (all?) of any inconsistency will be the fault of the AF sensor.
What about trying a sample for another mount, like for Nikon? I have owned a Sigma EX 18-50/2,8 for Canon, exhibiting quite "outspoken" AF-issues. Friends have owned Nikon and Sigma w no trouble at all. Actually, I have seldom heard of such issues with Sigma in Nikon or other non-Canon mounts. Surely there have been such issues, but I have a distinct gut feeling that Canon is the mount Sigma have had most trouble with, historically and possibly even today.
Kodachrome200: to bad they didnt manufacture and sell it under there own brand. could have saved us all 500 bux
"their" own brand you must have meant...and I´d say that it´s worth a few bucks to have it Zuiko/Oly branded anyway ;-)
Frank_BR: Something is very strange in this history.
The Zuiko 75mm F1.8 lens was announced in Feb 8, 2012. However, according to the Egami blog the Sigma patent's filing date is Feb 3, 2012, that is, only five days before the announcement.
On the other hand, after a lens design starts, it takes months, if not years, until the production (and announcement) effectively happens. So, it is not reasonable to think that Sigma started the design process of that lens long before filing the patent application.
"it IS reasonable..." should have been better wording in your last sentence corresponding to the rest of your rant (!)(?)
"Large maximum aperture" hahaha, they (Fuji´s press release content writers) are surely a bit funny here...albeit this aperture is, say, 1/3 of a stop better than some other lenses in the same category. But to deem an improvement of 1/3 of a stop, "large" ? I don´t think so ;-)
fmian: Does anyone know what kind of deposit is required? I would imagine it's at the full price of the camera in case the 'borrower' does not come back.Why cannot one just find a retailer with a good return policy instead?Paxtons in Sydney offers a 45 day return policy. No questions asked.Surely 45 days is better than 48 hours?Also, not sure about the UK, but in Australia it's within a consumers rights to return a product they are not satisfied with. I believe the allowed time is 1-2 weeks.At least, that is the rules we abided by when I was working for HN.
I think psychologically it´s much easier to loan something, even if you know very well its price if you like to follow up bying it, than buying it first then return it if not satisfied. It feels better to "just" loan it if you are not 99% sure you´ll like it, than do the outlay of money and then have to get back and try some explanation to "why you´d not keep it".
This psochological reason, I believe, is valid even though there surely are many "no questions asked" return policies around...even then, some will feel awkward coming back and having to "ask" for his/her money back.
FreedomLover: Interesting to see for some it's too big for others too small.
Looks like we have reached a point where it's obvious manufacturers should offer different grip sizes, or include them in the package or make it adjustable.
A modular camera will be nice too: exchangeable bodies, sensors, stabilisers, processors, lens mounts, lenses, displays, viewfinders, batteries, flashes and cards, connectors, wireless, bluetooth and GPS modules, software.Just like desktop computers today, but portable now.
Would make it easy to switch to infrared for a night, for example.Or for optimising price, quality, size, weight and look to our evolving possibilities, needs and tastes.Also good for repairs and the environment.
And exactly what has those remarks to do with Panasonic´s lending program of a certain camera, the DMC-GH3???
"Just three weeks after the European launch"
So, why is 3 weeks later considered "just 3 weeks" when I´d say it´s more like "a whole 3 weeks later than in Europe"???
Couldn´t help myself ;-)
ryansholl: Everyone seems to be stuck on the difference between 4/3 depth of field calculations (+2 stops equivalence) and 4/3 light throughput calculations (x1 equivalence).
Why does this have to be such a big deal? Same light throughput and same shutter speeds at equivalent focal lengths, much deeper depth of field. That's good sometimes. It's bad other times.
Lately it seems like everyone on the internet is deriving their own behavior from American politics. Total inability to admit anything other than "I have been completely right from the start"
Everybody knows that already! Those in the search for lenses for m4/3 are supposedly those who OWNs such a camera, and they KNOW the differences betw "FF" and m4/3 (of course exactly everybody doesn´t know but most do)
Thus, no need for FF apologists around here. And you may know: Manyy people use BOTH "FF" and APS-C/m4/3...happily and for the subjects/events they consider respective camera to work best.
al_in_philly: What I don't understand is why Olympus is releasing new lenses without weather sealing them? What use is producing a weather sealed flagship M4/3, the OM-D E-M5, if they don't also produce lenses which are sealed as well? I could maybe see it if the lenses were just a couple of hundred dollars (maybe), but not on a piece of glass on the other side of $500. Oh, one more thing: what's up with Oly being so niaggardly with lens shades? Don't their Product Development and Marketing departments talk to each other?
There is no flagship m4/3 Olympus camera, yet. The E-M5 is the current top model, yes, but the flagship is yet to arrive. Olympus has officially said there will be coming both lower and higher models in the "OM-D" series, so to speak. (for my part, all Oly M4/3 cameras is part of one series, their names nonwithstanding) When the higher speced, than the E-M5, model comes, I´d think at least a couple more weather sealed lenses will also be launched. At the time, or soon after.
G L: I have a m43 camera and the EM5 is what I would like to have. So I voted for it.
Just one remark: If Nikon had not the D800 and the D600 in the competition they might have won.
But anyway, the EM5 is a camera of which many people think it is a very good compromise between capability, size and prize. It really is an achievement to bring all these features in such a small package. The EM5 deserves this win.
??? How could Nikon have won if they´d NOT had the D800 & D600 in the "competition"? (which was no competition, but a POLL, by the way!) ;-)
gbvalli: Up to me, it's not possible to judge together cameras with different viewfinder type. OM-D is loved from fans of electronic viewfinder, but not so from those who prefer the optical one . Perhaps it would be better to diversify the match, establishing 2 or 3 categories .
This was a POLL, not a competition or a test of what was the best camera of 2012!
By your logic, it would be possible to have dozens of catogories, and then this poll would be very uninteresting, AND it would not even give a clue to which camera DPR´s readers as a whole thought was "their" best of 2012...
maxnimo: A theoretical question: If a wide angle lens is not sharp edge to edge then what's the point of having a wide angle?
@maxnimo:What´s the point of having any lens that is not sharp edge to edge???
The reality is most lenses are not as sharp at the edges/corners as they are in the center. Have always ben the case, will always stay so...generally.
Better, more expensive lenses can get close to perfect edge to edge sharpness, and you may know that is a characteristic pretty common in the Zuiko line up. Some closer to perfect, some not that close...but very few are afully BAD in the edges.
maxnimo: I've never seen a zoom lens (FF, APS or MFT) that's sharp edge to edge at any price. I've never even seen a wide angle prime lens (FF, APS or MFT) that's sharp edge to edge at any price. So, unless this lens is magic, it's overpriced by 500 %, since blurry, distorted edges will make it useless for any wide angle shooting I do. To sum it all up, all the wide angle zooms I've ever seen up to now are anywhere from poor to total garbage.
My Zuiko 14-54 II is sharp corner to corner, even wide open. Stopped down one stop it´s not just sharp, it´s very very sharp!
This goes also for the 12-60 & extremely well for the 14-35/2 Olympus makes.
That much for "no wa-zooms are sharp c to c at any price"
tongki: this is totally backward,Canon already has EF 24-105mm f/4 and now provide EF 24-70mm f/4,and we don't need stupid IS on wide lenses !!!
it really slowing it down !!!I don't like using IS on wide lenses, that is stupid idea !
Are you so out of your mind as it seems?
IS is never silly to have at your disposal, even if you don´t need it always, for all images. So, you imply that never shoot at wide angle at long shutter speeds? Always, instead, chooses a high ISO`? Give me a brake... of course a wide angle shot can very well have IS to its advantage, if light is low enough and you want/need LOW noise...
flbrit: For my use it seems great.
I will consider trading in my VRII f2.8 depending how it tests on IQ mounted on the D800e compared to the 2.8. I am also interested to see how it takes TC's.
I will not be an early adopter
@MPA1:Who expected you to trade your 2,8? Why even bother to say a word, when it´s not of any worth to folks who ARE indeed interested in this lens? This lens simply is not made for you! It is made for those who crave a more compact thing and 'who do not want to move over to Canon'!!! Is that so hard to understand? Everybody doesn´t think *exactly* the same as you do, or have the exact same needs as you have.
It is quite clear to me that many have hesitated to go for Nikon for the simple reason Nikon have ´til now not offered this lens type. The Canon 70-200/4L is one of the absolutely best lenses available at a "earthly" price. (I did own one before switching to Olympus)Very strange then, that when Nikon at last do release a competitor, they get complaints. It´s close to laughable. I say this not knowing how good this lens will show itself to be, but I do think Nikon have taken their measures so they safely can launch it and get a good business from having it in their line up.
GeorgeZ: Given that most PCs are still overwhelmed when they need to edit Full HD and that no TV and very few computer screens can display more than Full HD one has to wonder if 4K is what the industry should be pushing right now. Considering how long it took for TV stations to go HD (it's expensive!) I guess it'll take at least another 10 years before any major station goes 4K.
Hen and egg situation in a nutshell ;-)
Somewhere it must start, mustn´t it? (if it´s supposed to ever came, that is)
Why complain, then, when the start is beginning to get obvious...???
magneto shot: my heart stopped at "4k camera" but then i realized...whats the point of a 4k video that have no shallow DOF. next...
So, hi resolution (whatever you may deem as hi rez) for still photography only relates to "shallow DOF" systems, or what???
How shallow must DOF be for you (in stills, movie, or any photographic use) to be deemed "shallow enough"???
The news item describes this sensor as "Sony´s latest", but never clearly tells if this actually IS the sensor that sits in the cameras mentioned in the item.
Indirectly I get the impression it is this sensor, but normally the "latest" sensor is a sensor that´s presnted and WILL BECOME used in coming cameras.
So, is this "latest" sensor just the latest to already have come to actual use, or is it the latest that just have got presented, but not yet launched, and thus will get used in the next generation of cameras?
(maybe I did miss some info on that, sorry to bother in such a case)
Noirist: What's ridiculous about the pricing? Fast high quality zoom lenses are expensive to make. The full frame Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 is $2400 and the 43rds Olympus 35mm-100mm f2.0 is $2500. If you don't want to buy it at that price, then don't. But let the rest of us be glad that Panasonic has made two excellent fast zoom lenses available to anyone who wants one for their micro43rds camera.
But they didn´t charge even close to the same high price for this lens as CaNikon (or Sony) do for their "same angle of view" counterparts, did they?