alffastar: Oly never made a micro 4/3 lens with 24-120mm equivalent and 2.8-4.0. Even if Oly makes such a lens it will cost more than this camera and will be both bigger and havier, so I am definitely buying this Canon to use it as everyday camera and also travel camera and will use only my primes with my OM-D!
Questions (waiting for Jan 28 for answers):is AF better than E M-5 ?is EVF better than E M-5 ?is shutter up to 1/8000 ?is as reliable as the E M-5 ?
If the answers are "yes", if more lenses will come up, and Olympus does not upgrade the E M-5 within 12 months (forget the E M1 -that's for 4/3 lenses), then I will switch to Fuji
SteveNunez: Considering the worldwide growth of m4/3, surprised they don't offer this len for that system- it would easily be the largest focal length available and would surely be popular with m4/3 shooters....ashame.
Agreed.However, please not this lens with an adapted m4/3 mount.a decent (not necessarily very fast) prime tele (250 - 400mm) or zoom tele (150-300mm) designed specifically for m4/3 would (IMO) be received enthusiastically
I respect this review. which proves once again to me not to make a judgement on a new camera based on its specs alone when it is released, but rather to wait for a professional review like this one. btw, I was interested in this camera, not to buy it because am happy with my Em-5, yet interested to see the innovation trend taking a good direction.Hopefully this trend will continue with refinements and improvements, and in a few years I will upgrade to a better camera.
is E M1 AF faster than E M-5 AF with micro 4/3 lenses mounted on both cameras? how faster?
in other words: did Olympus improve the contrast AF ? or did contrast detection AF already reach its limit?
Eleson: "and utilises the existing Super35mm sensor in the EOS C100."Tell us more! Did the sensor always have this capability or does it mean they it can be done on every sensor? I think that last sentence was the coolest part of this press release.
Read also: "phase detection Auto Focus (AF) technology designed to support video shooting, and a compatible CMOS sensor was included in the original design of the EOS C100"
I'm really considering putting on eBay my E M-5 with the 75/1.8. That should give me enough fund to buy this marvellous Leica with the fascinating soft pouch.
absentaneous: in some way it of course make sense but on the other hand I wonder where would be fair to draw the line. for example, I come across a great looking sports car on the street and I take a picture of it and turn it into a poster and I sell copies of it. does that mean the company which designed and constructed the car can sue me? by that logic one couldn't possible take a picture of something man made or designed and use it commercially without permission without getting sued.
@ absentaneous1) the firm who designed the clothes the model was wearing maybe is the firm commissioning the spot. 2) the tires the ferrari is using or the color ferrari is painted with are part of the ferrari; so it would be enough to have the ferrari consent. 3) The permission from the parents who gave birth to the model are needed only if the model is under age.
if you want to use a ferrari and a fashion model in a spot to sell whatever, you must pay the model and seek permission to have a ferrari in the spot.
The sculptor's work was exposed to the public the same way a song is copyrighted and published. Anybody who sings that song in concert for a profit should pay something to the author.Of course the USPS had to pay the sculptor.As someone in this forum already pointed out, it is very strange that the US government didn't reserve all rights to reproduce and use in any way the sculptor's work when his work was commissioned and he was paid.Isn't that what happens, for instance, when you enter one of your photos into a photographic contest?
Well done for Nikon, except.... its marketing stinks because you cannot buy just the AW1 and the 10mm (equiv. 27mm) ONLY.Underwater snorkeling I would use the 27mm equivalent ONLY -is that me, or anybody else agrees?(also a flash would be useful)
Chris_in_Osaka: Well, it wouldn't be a first. Back in the pre-m4/3's days, weren't the Zuiko 18-180mm and 70-300mm Sigma designed? The only difference is that those were low end "standard" lenses. The 75mm 1.8mm is a higher end product.
What I'd be more interested in finding out is if Olympus is actually manufacturing the 75mm. Considering that almost everything else in their product line is made in China, and sales of the old regular 4/3's lenses that were made in Japan are pretty much as dead as that system, it wouldn't surprise me if the 75mm is made in Japan by Sigma. I can't imagine Olympus are keeping a lens factory running to produce only 2 high end, limited market lenses (the 75mm and 12mm).
Another company manufacturing for Olympus wouldn't be a first either. If I remember correctly, the original E-1 camera, the only E system camera to have been manufactured in Japan, was built by Sanyo.
Sigma lenses are made in Japan.... is Sigma making the 75/1.8 for olympus?
Sigma became a very good quality lens maker. Will they ever design and make a 250mm/f4 for m4/3 ? (it'll be ok if sold under different "brand" name...)
(Dpreview's "wolf in sheep's clothing" couldn't say it better...)
TN Args: Why would they choose an eye point of only 17.5mm? Surely eyeglass wearers like me cannot live with that? My camera's eye point is 22mm and it is only just enough when wearing glasses. I would not want to go below 21mm.
What were they thinking?
maybe can the EVF prescription be adjusted so that it can at least be used w/out prescription glasses ?
Olympus ! what were you thinking when you made the EP5 without an EVF ?
Marty4650: I just want to throw this out.
If you need fast lenses that require manual focusing, then consider an f/1.2 legacy lens with an adapter for your M4/3 camera.
I just checked ebay, and found the following recent sales...
Canon FD 55mm f/1.2 lens in good condition..... $186(in fact, there were several that sold for under $200)Nikon Non AI 55mm f/1.2 lens in good condition. $260Minolta MD 50mm f/1.2 lens in good condition... $269
the legacy lenses you quote can only be compared (maybe) to only one of the Nokton f1.2 lenses: the last one (42.5mm). However, what you write makes sense.Unless..... unless Cosina-Voigtlander has other plans: considering the three Cosina-Voigtlander 1.2 Nokton lenses, all for mft, and considering that they build the "poor man Leica" FF film Bessas, I wonder if Cosina -Voigtlander is planning to follow the way of Leica, and come out with a manual focus digital rangefinder mft ?
Gesture: I'd like to see Cosina complete the circle and issue its own digital camera (Epson RD-1 successor). Would love it to take LTM lenses like the RD-1, but that's a dream. How many cameras has Cosina built off that one chassis. (Olympus, Nikon, Bessa, Zeiss Ikon, ...)
considering the three Cosina-Voigtlander 1.2 lenses, all for mft, and considering that they build the "poor man Leica" FF film Bessas, I wonder if Cosina -Voigtlander is planning to follow the way of Leica, and come out with a manual focus digital rangefinder mft ?
tko: $1265, all manual, 760g.
Canon 85MM F/1.8 = $365, all auto, 425 G
Less performance, more expensive, and heavier. A whopping 0.3" smaller in one dimension, 0.1 in the others.
A perfect example of how M34rds rips of the unsuspecting buyers who think that a F0.95 lens is amazing, and close their eyes to the real specs.
No wonder M43rds doesn't want equivalence spec published - they reveal the sham.
"Less performance"? Really? Then take two cameras: your Canon with a f1.9 and an OM D E M-5 mft with f1.2All other factors being the same, the E M-5 with a f1.2 can take a photo where the light is so low that f1.9 is not good enough.
fastlass: Can you just say that this is a 42.5 mm m43 lens. The target audience knows what the photographic characteristics in terms of angle of view, depth of field control, and background blur are for them. Let each standard stand on its own.
Really? then take two cameras: a FF with a f1.9 and mft with f1.2All other factors being the same, the mft with a f1.2 can take a very low light photo where the f1.9 is not good enough for the FF.