For $1,600 the 35/1.4 has to be better than any other 35 fr9m Canikon or Sigma.
The 28/2.0 seems to be priced fair.
CaPi: I am told be dealers that it is a completely different shooting experience with a fullf rame. Dont know what to think really. AM I missing out on something or is my APS-C not that different?hm
In normal shooting conditions the difference is not much but when you go towards the extreme ends like low light or thin DOF the FF kit stands out significantly enough to wanna spend the extra dollars.I shoot FF since 2011 and wouldn't want to go back anymore. For other shooting styles this might not be relevant though.
Yuvalm: To both Carl Showalter and nerd2 : you are misleading. Why ?
"...subject distance and crop the wider shot to the framing of the other..." - this is exactly the missleading part of your argument (as well as Nerd2's) which goes:
"...b) Zoom the lens to the wider end, keep the aperture same, and take picture again ...c) Now crop the second image so that the FOV exactly matches the image of (1)..."
Cropping reduces the resolution, and enlargeing the crop diminishes the focus - this is right-out cheating, just to make a misleading point.
If on the other hand, YOU want an eye opener, try shooting with two different focal lengths on the same aperture,with the same distance from the object, no crop, and no other such BS, and see for yourself.
Here is a vivid demonstration why your bogus experiment is cheating :
Haven't decided yet which of you too has the longer p*nis. Please keep going a bit more for a final conclusion :)
backayonder: Amongst others one of the problems I have with Lomo is some of their pricing.
Lubitel cost around £20 in the early 1980's now they are selling it for $365
>> Not to mention the 6x6 negatives will blow away the FF at fraction of the price...
No they won't.
G3User: I agree, number 3 is a Photoshop fail. What I have noticed with recent competitions is that there is a trend towards using untrained judges. The judges here look like they man the gates taking tickets from visitors. Anyone with a half photography wit would not have chosen this one or they should have asked to see the raw file (if they know what a raw file is). Again, another example of the demise of photography, using just any soccer mom to be a judge is a joke and a discredit to the other honest photographers in this competition. Another Photoshop fail is in the first image, the boat to the right and to the distance looks totally fake.
Lol... it's water and a mirror image. That man is not walking along a mountain ridge but a long a lake you expert.
Just installed the new firmware and it fixed the data display issue. I am a lot more confident with my ep5 with lower shutter speeds now. Never had a big issue with shutter shock but it's always on your mind while you're shooting.
Like ! :)
Just on the edge of getting a Canon 70-200/4IS and now this announcement. I would be happy about a black lens and saving a few hundred dollars but then I saw the suggested price... If this is real I will go for the original big time. The Canon sells online for about $1,250.
peevee1: Will you update the review with the mention of the fix?
Although it is a year-old overpriced camera, nobody probably will buy it anyway...
It is/was expensive but besides the shutter shock issue it is a very fine camera with fantastic features and form factor. I have mine since almost when it was released.
The shutter shock issue is a bit overrated as it occurs not very often if at all. I couldn't clearly tell on any of my slightly blurred images if it was the shock or just me a bit shaky.
Prices have come down recently and I even bought mine early days in the kit with the 17/1.8 and VF-4. After selling the 17 which I owned already the camera incl. VF-4 cost me under $1k which I found fair at that time and even today.
Actually the only flaw for me is the stupid - I repeat stupid - flash release button. It's so nervous and easily pressed and the tiny flash is very vulnerable when exposed in a camera bag. This is something that Olympus should have tested in pre-production better. How could this have been missed as even 20 years old cameras already had a clever flash release button that you cannot accidentally press...
I purchased my 16-35/2.8L II for $1,200 new so this 16-35/4L IS has to deliver outstanding IQ to justify the price. I think if street prices drop to around $1k in a few months then this lens is a really nice alternative to the f2.8 version. Not everyone needs the f2.8 but IS will help at any aperture. Especially landscape shooters will be able to take more shots without tripod at f8.0 which they would usually have donw from tripod or f4.0 to reduce camera shake.
We have seen that a Sigma 50/1.4 can compete in practical terms with a Zeiss Otus at a fraction of the cost (and while having AF). Why should this lens here not be comparable with a Leica Noctilux?Steve Huff has posted some impressions and it seems to be a hit but let's see the fine print in a few weeks... Very interesting lens either way.
What a big fuss about nothing. So Leica came out with an overprices Nex clone (I am exaggerating...) and they use software correction with their lenses. So what?
Isn't the image quality in the end that counts? If the images can convince the critics then piece should be restored again.
I am sure that Leica doesn't just shortcut their lens development by simply using software to cover up what they could have corrected by optical adjustments. I think it's just natural that software and optics work together and I highly doubt that the end result - the final - image will be less than stellar with the new T lens lineup.
I am not a Leica owner and don't plan to become one in the near future. Other brands have similar strong lenses and perhaps even stronger bodies (feature-wise). Leica mutated over the last 20 years or so to a luxury brand like LV, Guggi, Prada and Co... That is ok and no crime. It's free to buy or leave them in the shelf.
Daniel from Bavaria: To all the moaners and naysayers:
I do photography for many, many years now. I still own a complete Canon FF system with quality glas. I also own a Fuji X-System with some glas, as also the 1.2 56mm lens.
You see, plenty of experience and enough equipment to compare. And in my humble opinion the 1.2 56mm lens is one of the finest lenses I've ever used. It's just a joy to use und the results are lovely. Period.
P.S. Some pics taken with that lens are in my gallery
Now you need to tell us what other fine Canon FF lenses you use... ;)
I find my Sigma 35/1.4 Art on FF better than the Canon 35L or 50L which I owned both. So I am not surprised that Fuji is able to come up with some outstanding glass.
Damn... now I want one :)Just the body and the 23/2.0 would be enough. Or shall I better get the Fuji X-E2 and the 23/1.4 ?
This should be possible for the E-P5 as well? If so it could silence all the Pen critics and would pretty much make the Pen a Gold Award winning camera :)
I wondering why this FW update comes for the EM1 and not the Pen. I cannot imagine that the Pen doesn't have the same capabilities in terms of FW upgrades.
goshigoo: Panasonic is really doing very well recently (except the 42.5 f/1.2, but we can just ignore it since we already have 45 f/1.8)
The recent releases of GM1 / GX7 / GH4 / 15 / 12-32 and the upcoming 35-100 are on the right path of m43; the true spirit of m43in terms of pricing and portability
I hope we will see a 8mm pancake prime or 9-18mm from panasonic soon
Not every comparison is linear when looking at price. You cannot simple compare equivalent focal lengths or apertures and then try to make a linear inter-/extrapolation of what the price should be...
That is simply spoken naive.
Important to factor is is build quality, manufacturer's marketing strategy and target of a certain product, product weight and size, overall performance.
I love my Sigma 85/1.4 for my Canon FF but also love my Oly 45/1.8. Both cannot be compared as they are completely different in almost any aspect except the field of view is similar - that's about it.
There is no point in comparing and raving about X vs. Y format. When I am in the New Zealand mountains for instance - hiking for 5 hours then I don't care about the cost/value ration of my Oly 45/1.8. I simply enjoy having it with me over the 5 times heavier Sigma 85 FF lens.
Poweruser: Although 15/1.7 sound spectacular on paper what you are really getting is a moderate wide angle (35mm terms) with almost no option to work with selective depth of field. Unless you really close up, compact camera / phone style.
Would it matter if this lens was f2.8 instead? A fast aperture at this focal length helps the smaller m43 sensor to gather enough photons in bad light. Picture-wise at 15mm it doesnt make a difference at all.
Scott Birch: >>We must have bokeh. We don't know why, but we must have bokeh.<<
Really laughed out very loud :D
Bokeh is cool and nice but you are right, some are too obsessed with it.
Marty4650: At this price point, with a fairly good EVF built in, and the incredible feature set.... we can pretty much assume that the Pen series is dead.
Perhaps not officially, but defacto.
Would anyone buy an EPL5 for around the same price?Does the EP5 make any sense now?
The Pen Mini might be the only survivor, for those who must have the absolute smallest and cheapest.
The Pen is a different camera concept and a different target group. Probably more the female or hipster market? In any case, I don't think Olympus would give it up.Perhaps there will be no more 'top of the line' Pen like the E-P5 but only more entry level featured Pens to not compete too much with the OMD. I love my Pen and like the option to take off the VF ;)
I am still sitting on my old 5Dmk2 and are just waiting for the right time to get FF mirrorless when it is ready. Ready means for me the same AF performance and a wide range of native AF lenses at fast and slow speeds (e.g. fast 35/1.4 and a compact 2.8 alternative).
Sony seems to go he right way but I cannot see a decent and affordable lens selection within the next 2 years.
Fuji X seems to be much better here but damn it... not FF. I am well covered in m4/3 and would only consider a FF system if I change over and wouldn't consider to maintain 3 systems. To me m4/3 and FF are the right balance. Mirrorless in m4/3 is mature but FF by far not yet.
So I think that many people are watching the changing market and perhaps hold back in purchasing decisions. Or... it's just a market saturation or regression...
Craig from Nevada: This looks like a very good value.
Can second that. I used for years Canon APSC and since 2011 Canon FF. I have no complaints about it. But since a year I also got m4/3 and 4 prime lenses (P14/O17/P25/O45) and I love the Pen 5 form factor. It's a serious system and worth the money I think.