Reading mode: Light Dark

Who is *holding-fire* on buying new Zuikos until m4/3 is released?

Go to last post
TonyinJapan wrote:
[snip]
TonyinJapan said:
...until I know which
lens, firstly, actually works, and, secondly, works to acceptable
speed, and, thirdly, does not involve a loss of IQ, I cannot see the
value of investing in $300-$1000 for lenses that may be just limited
to the 4/3rds system.
Click to expand...
So, if I understand your reasoning correctly, before you knew of the existence of Micro 4/3rds, you bought no lenses because they would have been "limited to the 4/3rds system"? Or did you actually care?

I buy lenses if I think they'll solve an imaging conundrum for me. If I was concerned about their possible future compatibility with a second system, I sure as He!! wouldn't have bought Olympus in the first place. And you can always sell lenses on the second-hand market.

Why are so many of my fellow Olympians irrational children?

Garth
 
I am!
--
Duarte Bruno
 
I certainly do not see myself buying any 4/3 lenses until I know more about compatibility. Until I know more I will not be buying anything unless I have a real, immediate need.

M4/3 -- especially the G1 -- is the direction I want to go, if they come up with a lens that fits my needs. Otherwise, I suspect there will be other mirror-free alternatives by this time next year.

(Note to Oly and Panny: Give me a quality, fairly fast normal zoom -- something equivalent to the 14-54 or 12-60. A 14-75 2.8-4 would be perfect. Small would be nice, but quality is more important.)

From the Olympus interview, it sounds as if we are looking at a pretty long wait to see products in the stores. I sold my 300 body just before the m4/3 announcement, planning to buy a 520 to use alongside my 330. Now that plan is on hold, waiting for either m4/3 or the tweener, but I need to have a backup in hand by November. Right now it is a coin toss between going cheap with a second 330 or giving Nikon another try with a D300.

--
W.

NSFW -- My alternative portrait and figure photography
http://www.silvermirage.com
 
fldspringer said:
JiminDenver said:
Aside from the fish eye and one of the f 1.4 primes , I pretty much
have what I want.
I decided not to pursue the SHG lenses when I bought the 12-60 and
50-200 SWD.
Click to expand...
I've thought of swapping out the 11-22 & 14-54 for the 12-60, but I'm
really not displeased with either of the old choices, so they are
likely to stay in the kit. Really, I'm quite content there.
Click to expand...
The 11-22 is more than just the FL at the bottom of the 12-60. I have both and still use the 11-22 for interiors and other wide angle situations that require distortion corrected images.
fldspringer said:
fldspringer said:
I've been wanting the 100 f 2 macro since it was announced, if it
isn't at least 2-1, I wont need it.
Click to expand...
I've been living with 1:2 with the 50 f2 for awhile now. I can't
play with the big guys where it comes to magnification, but I still
like to mess around.

I'd be content with 1:1, but I understand where you come from. There
again, the old EC-14 will add a bit too.
Click to expand...
I would still be interested if I hadn't developed the technique and lighting to use the 35mm/EC 20 at 2-1.

I'll be first in line if the 100mm comes in at 2-1, add that to the EC 20 and I will be in heaven.
fldspringer said:
fldspringer said:
With the economy coming up, the prices are going to drop, especially
the used prices. Who know what will be up for grabs. I may end up
with the SHG lenses yet.
Click to expand...
The 50-200 is my main lens, and even if I got the 35-100, it would
likely stay that way. The 35-100 is too heavy to remain on the
camera for as long as I tend to carry the thing.

The 50-200 can throw some pretty rough bokeh in the settings I shoot
in. Im alway full of envy when looking at the output of the 35-100.
It also has a near perfect range for my shooting as far as focal
length is concerned. I do want one. I will have one. It won't be
right now, though.
Click to expand...
Keep watching the B/S, I bet it will get real busy as people try to raise cash for the holidays or everyday expensive.
fldspringer said:
--
-
Greg

http://www.spanielsport.com/
Click to expand...
--
JimB
Bug Whisperer

Anything is possible except what you tell yourself isn't.
 
gnarayan said:
Honestly, I don't get this. Before there was any talk of m43 (i.e. a
few months ago even) the situation was that one had to invest
$300-1000 in lenses that were limited to the 4/3rds system.
Click to expand...
Yes. But the situation is different now, because:
gnarayan said:
The question to ask is if 4/3rds will survive with m43 now on the
scene or will Oly and Pany focus on m43.
Click to expand...
And you can bet, even if Olympus may try not to let their Micro-FT gear compete with their own DSLR range, Panasonic will not limit themselves in any way in the long run, other brands will follow, whether they join Micro FT or build their own mirrorless systems, and they will chop off a big chunk from the entry level DSLR market, which is about all what's left to Four Thirds at this point in time.

Cheers,
Robert
 
TonyinJapan said:
I know with the interview posted by DPR that Olympus will ‘try’ and
make their existing 4/3 lenses compatible, but until I know which
lens, firstly, actually works, and, secondly, works to acceptable
speed, and, thirdly, does not involve a loss of IQ, I cannot see the
value of investing in $300-$1000 for lenses that may be just limited
to the 4/3rds system.

I see myself very much in the DSLR-sized sensor in compact form camp,
and wonder who else is ‘holding-fire’ on 4/3 lens purchases until
m4/3 is released?

--
Regards,
Tony
Click to expand...
--

I think the most significant point in the interview as far as m4/3 was concerned came from Mr Hilbig:-

"If you consider, for example, all the investment we're currently putting into lenses for bridge cameras, like the SP series, you're talking about a 'one time' investment, and once the camera is discontinued you throw away that investment because you can't necessarily use it for the next model. The good thing on the system development of lenses is that you only develop that lens once, and you build it forever; it stays in your lineup. So we don't have to redevelop a 20x zoom lens all the time, so we can devote more resources to developing new system lenses."

This says to me that, initially, they may produce an m4/3 body accompanied by the 18-180 e-series lens, i.e. they offer the P&S sector a one lens solution which they can use anywhere without the hassle of having to change lenses. Think about where all the technology changes are taking place; in-body. It makes sense both economically and environmentally for Olympus and the user not to have to junk the lenses when bodies are upgraded. It makes sense to have a standard lens interface defined when designers are creating new bodies and it encourages users to "port" an existing lens they are familiar with to a new body. Reading between the lines, I believe that will be the initial thrust of Olympus' efforts in m4/3. As they said, they are two parallel product lines.

They are prepared to go the extra mile for those who would like to be able to use their 4/3 lens investment on an m4/3 body and I would guess that lies squarely with the 4/3 development team to do, but I would not choose to stop buying lenses for 4/3 system backs while I waited for Olympus to develop a range of pro-grade m4/3 lenses which could only be used on m4/3 bodies. Rather than m4/3 squeezing out the 4/3 and APS-C market it is likely to be the bridge camera sector that gets squeezed out by m4/3 IMO. Clearly there would be advantages to Olympus in taking some of the m4/3 miniaturisation of components and transferring them into the 4/3 bodies so there may be a degree of convergence over time, but I, personally, would expect both lines to continue for some years to come.The old maxim still applies:- buy what you need when you need it and not before.

Mike
 
nada
 
TonyinJapan said:
I see myself very much in the DSLR-sized sensor in compact form camp,
and wonder who else is ‘holding-fire’ on 4/3 lens purchases until
m4/3 is released?
Click to expand...
Holding back, but no due to m4/3. Am waiting to see what sensor improvements are forthcoming in terms of headlight lattitude and noise over the next 6 months with a view to the E3 successor.
 
Raist3d said:
work with contrast autofocus. Just slow and will be slower either way
vs u4/3rds. The trick was as was discovered by someone else, to do
the "magnify" preview and then it does contrast auto-focus.
Click to expand...
Well, but doesn't the camera still perform an additional phase detection AF step before shutter release with the non-cdaf-compatible lenses, tiny it may be? Because it can't be sure the contrast AF result was exact enough? At least that's how I understood the implementation to be in the E-420/520.

Cheers,
Robert
 
Robert Schroeder said:
gnarayan said:
The question to ask is if 4/3rds will survive with m43 now on the
scene or will Oly and Pany focus on m43.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Robert Schroeder said:
And you can bet, even if Olympus may try not to let their Micro-FT
gear compete with their own DSLR range, Panasonic will not limit
themselves in any way in the long run, other brands will follow,
whether they join Micro FT or build their own mirrorless systems, and
they will chop off a big chunk from the entry level DSLR market,
which is about all what's left to Four Thirds at this point in time.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure about how successful the mirror less systems will be. The G1 with its EVF is more expensive than many intro level SLRs. I don't know how much of that is the technology costs and how much of that is Pany stupid pricing. The EVF less Oly mockup might be cheaper but I think a lot of people who are int he market for an entry level DSLR will not go for it without the EVF. I'm also still skeptical about the EVF and AF for lag and in low light - initial reports have been promising for the most part but at least one website has called the EVF disorienting (engadget) and they have all said it does not compare to an OVF in low light. I'd like to try it before I decide one way or the other.

Whoever starts building their own systems is still going to have to come out with a lens lineup. So I don't think the DSLRs are going to be going anywhere. There is a lot of potential for this EVIL technology to be game changing and really reshape the market at all levels but it depends so much on how good the underlying technology and final implementations will be so I don't see this happening for a good long while. My feeling with m43 and EVIL in general is wait and watch but don't hold your breath yet.

Cheers,
-Gautham

--
C&C always welcome.
Reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/gnarayan/
 
He who sits on the fence get a sore crotch.

To hold fire would assume I will buy a M4/3 camera and that I can not see in the near future, If Olympus brought out a 400mm/f4 or even a f/5.5 I would sell my left brass bell to buy one.

I will unlikley buy a dinky cam so I will continue with the standard stuff.
--
Collin

http://www.pbase.com/collinbaxter

Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but by the moments that take our breath away. (George Carlin)

 
Mark Thornton said:
IF I was considering the 7-14, then I might well wait to see what the
m4/3 version was like (and its cost).
Click to expand...
Would anyone really try to cobble an existing 7-14 on Olympus's diminutive micro 4/3rds cameras? That would be horribly awkward and uncomfortable to use. I figure that if people use the old lenses, they'll confine them to the smallest of the bunch, if Olympus only releases cameras based on those proto-bodies and not on a Panasonic-type G1 camera.
--



'I cried because I had no E-3. Then I met a man with no E-510'

Olympus E-410, E-330, Nikon D100 (IR) & Pentax K20D.
57 lenses of various types from most brands.
 
The lack of a decent longer zoom is also making me wait on the sidelines, as is how well the 20mm f1.7 would do for portraits.
WMann said:
I certainly do not see myself buying any 4/3 lenses until I know more
about compatibility. Until I know more I will not be buying anything
unless I have a real, immediate need.

M4/3 -- especially the G1 -- is the direction I want to go, if they
come up with a lens that fits my needs. Otherwise, I suspect there
will be other mirror-free alternatives by this time next year.

(Note to Oly and Panny: Give me a quality, fairly fast normal zoom --
something equivalent to the 14-54 or 12-60. A 14-75 2.8-4 would be
perfect. Small would be nice, but quality is more important.)

From the Olympus interview, it sounds as if we are looking at a
pretty long wait to see products in the stores. I sold my 300 body
just before the m4/3 announcement, planning to buy a 520 to use
alongside my 330. Now that plan is on hold, waiting for either m4/3
or the tweener, but I need to have a backup in hand by November.
Right now it is a coin toss between going cheap with a second 330 or
giving Nikon another try with a D300.

--
W.

NSFW -- My alternative portrait and figure photography
http://www.silvermirage.com
Click to expand...
 
...at least for the next year or so imo. Initially I was quite excited about the m4/3 announcement, but then quickly realized that lens compatibility was going to be really limited and/or cumbersome. I see this as almost completely a Panasonic iniatitive-- for now anyway.

Further, the G1 is not going to be a fast, responsive camera like the E3, and after using the E3 for nearly a year now (and the 520), I want the E3s responsiveness that includes fast AF and 5fps. The E3 is a much "quicker" camera than even the quite good 520.

So, I'm just going to table m4/3 considerations and see what develops with it-- a year from now much, much more will be known about it.

But for now I'm sort of drooling over the 9-18 for it's small size, weight, and 72mm filter size.

Eventually, a small m4/3 in place of a P&S could be in my future.

Cheers. Craig
--
'Shoot freely and edit ruthlessly' me, November 2002-- after purchase of E-1.
Equipment in profile.
 
As presented, I have no interest whatsoever in uFT. Holding fire? I'm not holding back on anything.
--
D620L -> D540 -> C750UZ -> E-500 -> E-510 -> E-3
 
Olympus has shown commitment to 4/3, there's an attractive tweener in the make and a successor to the E3 in design.

The G1 is a DSLR wannabe (one should buy a decent bridge camera with a good zoom instead...).

The Olympus P&S tin box is just ugly (but might evolve to be the true gem of mFT - make the body black, maybe add a rangefinder-like VF, give it 14 MP etc. and you have the killer of the DP1).

In regard of the C 5DII, Oly has to push up MP, nothing else...

Cheers,

Claus.

--

... when the photograph annihilates itself as medium to be no longer a sign but the thing itself...

 
I just picked up Bootstrap's PL 14-50.

I'm not advocating impulse buying, but if you want something, and have a need for something, and can afford something, then you should just buy it.

In this case if it works with both m4/3 and 4/3 then great, but you need to identify for yourself what your needs are.

Mine are being met quite well by lagging edge 4/3 gear thank you :)

--
Good shooting.
  • Adam
Equipment in plan
 
Garth Wood said:
So, if I understand your reasoning correctly, before you knew of the
existence of Micro 4/3rds, you bought no lenses because they would
have been "limited to the 4/3rds system"? Or did you actually care?
Click to expand...
Pre-m4/3 announcement, ignorance is bliss, so why would I care about something I do not know? But now there IS knowledge that a new system DOES exist and is ‘maybe’ compatible with this new system... or ‘maybe not’, it does change the landscape to future purchases (for me).

You have to consider why some people bought into the Olympus in the first place: compact and portable, good quality build, while maintaining high-quality optics. Even Dpreview said m4/3 is something that Olympus can finally deliver on the promises they made -- which is probably not far from the reasons of why I bought into Olympus in the first place as stated above.

From this, m4/3 is the natural direction for me. Maybe not for others, and I respect that, and hope your 4/3 Zuiko lens purchases now and in the future brings you much happiness. But for me, even though the next year or two is exciting for the industry, it is unchartered territory. Just like the recent Blu-Ray vs. HD-DVD (maybe a bad example), for me, it is probably best to keep those pennies under the pillow until there is a clear view over the horizon.
Garth Wood said:
Why are so many of my fellow Olympians irrational children?
Click to expand...
Now, there you go mommy, doesn’t seem so ‘irrational’ does it?
Garth Wood said:
I buy lenses if I think they'll solve an imaging conundrum for me.
Click to expand...
Yes, I agree. If I absolutely, necessarily need it, it would be a purchase, especially if it was for my work (as a graphic designer) and not just for my pleasure. Luckily, I have the lenses I need to last me until this m4/3 game pans out. Until then, it does not seem so irrational to keep my wallet in check, does it?

--
Regards,
Tony

--------
“To see a world in a grain of sand, and a heaven in a wild flower,

Hold infinity in the palm of your hand, and eternity in an hour.” – William Blake –
--------



http://www.flickr.com/photos/26154011@N07/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top