SeeRoy: I'm shocked that this lens won't work with my E-M5. OTOH I'm not in the market for newly manufactured antiques so I wouldn't buy it anyway. Happy.
hmm... why do you say that it will not work with the E-M5 ?anyway... hope that the lens will be reviewed: it would be interesting to know if distortion etc are optical corrected....
how does it focus in the dark?does it heat when doing 4K video?
ok, ok... beautiful lens.... but... in mft we have the 75mm/f1.8 which is at least as good, costs way less and it is smaller and lighter.... and if your budget is tighter, then in mft you can use the Sigma 60mm/f2.8....
How does it compare with the Sigma 17-70 f 2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM ?The Sigma was praised for its IQ; now it costs $399
Funny, interesting and great photos.However, giving that 50% of marriages end in divorce, which one of the two spouses will wish in thirty years that he/she thru her/him down the cliff when they had a chance?ok - that's my bad sense of humor, so I apologize....
the specs comparison table seems to show that the E M-10 lcd is the tilting type. Isn't it fully articulated?
DenWil: Wish it came with the 90 f2 installed. Wide is useless to me.
In my opinion maybe the M series of cameras and lenses are at a dead end. They can still sell them the same way they still sell the M7.Instead, the Q is the starting point of a real modern digital Leica camera series.They do need to develop an interchangeable Q type version and Q lenses
Hopefully Leica will make an interchangeable version of both the Q camera and the 28mm summilux. And of course other Q lenses: 50mm , 90mm, 135mm etc.
I took a beautiful portrait of a face of a lady friend of mine (the lady is so beautiful that it would have been difficult, even for me, that the portrait could be ugly - and no, I am not posting it). Then unsing photoshop I made it B & W. I like the black & white version more than the original.My point is that for certain type of photos (face portrait is my case, but there could be other cases), for certain type of photos black & white is better.However, I cannot afford the Leica monochrome and a Leica lens unless I mortgage my house, and then manage to escape my wife reaction.
it seems a very nice camera ..... I would buy it; but have the E M-5 and would not consider upgrading to the G7 because:- would use the G7 with 10mm, 14mm and 25mm, but would not mount the 75mm without ibis. - now my money needs to go to a tele (Kipon & Canon 200mm/2.8 L ?) then in a year or two will look for a new camera with ibis.
Nikon 300mm/f4 ... shorter, lighter.......available next month for $ 2,000.When will OLYMPUS release their 300mm/f4 ?????
could Voigtlander manual-focus wide-angle lenses be mounted on the A7-II with an adapter? anyone did that?
Valentinian: Barney Britton (6): "one of the main differences in terms of performance between DSLRs and mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras has been autofocus".Well... also the EVF still has to catch-up with the DSLR' OVF...
EVF has been improving, but it is not yet as good as OVF for manual focus
Barney Britton (6): "one of the main differences in terms of performance between DSLRs and mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras has been autofocus".Well... also the EVF still has to catch-up with the DSLR' OVF...
Nobody need me to say that in the film era Leica was great: first class lenses, terrific range finder body.However, now, it is not cost-effective to make perfect lenses, because the modern camera software will correct distortions and aberrations; and the camera body doesn't have to last forever, because the digital evolution makes any camera almost semi-obsolete after a few years compared to the new developed ones.Sorry, Leica: you were a dream..... Now you are a memory of excellence. But to take photos other cameras are more fit.
ThePhilips: The LX100 made me realize what's missing.
No matter how hard I look at it, I see LX100 as nothing else but a m43 camera with a premium 12-35 zoom glued to it. There is no point for me to buy the LX100 as a camera - (if I decide to buy it) I would be buying it as a "lens" for my m43 collection.
And that made me realize: the missing are an LX101 with 100-300mm eq lens and an LX102 with 7-20mm eq lens. If Pana engineers have managed to cram the 12-35 into such dimensions, I'm pretty sure they can also do some magic with the longer and the wider lenses. LX100 is targeted at pro/semi-pro/enthusiasts. But to cover the market better, they also have to differentiate with the lenses: some users like it wider, some users like it longer. I'd definitely buy the LX102. And very likely the LX101. But LX100? I have already two lenses covering the "standard" range...
I "liked" your first paragraph: it was a great thing to say that the LX100 is actually .... a lens !actually, a very good lens: why would you buy a 12-35/2.8 when you could buy the LX100 and have a second body?I don't agree on your second paragraph: while a lens like the one on the LX100 could not be made for the innterchangeable M4/3, a "good" 100-300mm equivalent can be made, and I wish it would be made, or, even better, a prime 250mm/f4.5... (just dreaming)
What would be the technical reason not to release a 24-75mm(equivalent)/f1.7-2.8 for the interchangeable lens micro four thirds system?
Valentinian: and a TC 1.4 compatible with this lens only!
I am upset.Just waiting for LX100 reviews: if wide-angle distortions prove being well corrected, then I will sell my 10mm/2.8, 14mm/2.5 and 25mm/1.4, will buy the LX100 and keep the E M-5 with the 75mm (unfortunately w/out TC 1.4)- No I do not need the Huge Oly 40-150 -
yeah... it really makes sense not to make it compatible with the 75/1.8