how long are you prepared to wait for native lenses?

I love my m43 but eventually would like to complement my collection with a full frame system. Nice thing about legacy glass, besides price and quality, is the fact that I'll still be able to use them on full frame camera. Don't think i can say that about native m43.

I'm not necessarily being impatient, i'm just trying to build a well rounded, compatible collection/system for when i do add the full frame camera.

Plus, i enjoy getting away from the focus-by-wire experience by shooting with a real manual lens.

I don´t recommend buying into the system without a native portrait prime.

That´s it basically. No recommendations can be made without one. If they won´t announce one soon i might be gone as soon as something better comes along

Over two years and one of the most important lenses still missing. The Leica is neither bright not affordable so it doens´t count for me.

--
What´s that noise?

From one of the Canon Forums:

'I just came back from my first holiday with the 5D II (I think my wife was there as well). '

Jogger said:

tgutgu said:

Manual focusing:

In good light, in my opinion, it is much better and precise to focus with a tilted LCD of GH1 on a tripod than with any entry to mid DSLR. The LCD is larger and brighter than a OVF.

Click to expand...

All DSLRs today have liveview mode allowing for manual focusing if that is your thing. I use it on my 2+ year old D700 all the time. Its great. Canon even has a swivel LCD that lets you do that on its 60D and its over 2x the resolution of the GH1 LCD.

Click to expand...

Yes, but the 60D is the first and only DSLR from Canon to have a tiltable LCD. The resolution of the GH1's LCD is actually enough for precise focusing, of course, more resolution would be better.

My point was more the eye-level finder, where I would call the net quality and focusing accuracy of the large EVF of the GH1 superior over almost all entry to mid DSLRs. Only the high end models starting from Canon 5DMKII to the 1Ds and Nikon flagship models might have a slight edge in overall finder quality.

The problem with average OVFs of DSLRs is that in most cases they are used with slow zooms. The max aperture has influence on the brightness of an OVF, thus, the finder image is rather dark. On the otherhan, some of the loss of light can be balanced in an EVF, which isn't possible with OVF unless you significantly increase its quality and therefore its cost and weight.

Jogger said:

Jogger said:

The EVF of a GH1 has advantage in good light either, because it is larger and brighter and has the magnification features (which OVFs do not have). In low light, EVFs get noisier, so that focusing gets more problematic. But whereas in low light, you have tough time to see anything with the OVFs of the DSLRs, the GH1 EVF is still much brighter, and in my opinion still easier to focus.

Click to expand...

Jogger said:

nycphotography said:

Jogger said:

The problem is that you are approaching m43/NEX as your primary system. Neither are mature or good enough to serve that purpose. If you start with an SLR system, then the m43/NEX makes a whole lot more sense.

Click to expand...

I dunno, but my u43 stuff is pretty much replacing my D2x and lenses as my primary SLR. I find I have no interest in carrying and shooting the SLR stuff. Even with the legacy manual lenses I find the u43 works better, as the live LCD view makes it so much faster to see what I'm trying to set up and compose.

The only real achilles heel of the GH camera, to me, is the precision focusing in manual focus. The EVF does get tiring at that point. But it must be noted that I'm ALSO using the LCD to compose shots from angles that would be VERY difficult using a SLR's OVF. Over head, low angles, reaching out over railings, etc.

I'm going to do some more traditional shooting (ie eye level) w/ my primes and see how I feel about the precision of the EVF once I have more experience with it.

Click to expand...

--
Thomas

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
Thomas

NuFonaut said:

I don´t recommend buying into the system without a native portrait prime.

Click to expand...

Not everybody needs such kind of lens.

NuFonaut said:

That´s it basically. No recommendations can be made without one. If they won´t announce one soon i might be gone as soon as something better comes along

Over two years and one of the most important lenses still missing. The Leica is neither bright not affordable so it doens´t count for me.

Click to expand...

To me the Leica is quite affordable. Faster portrait lenses from the competition aren't all cheaper, it varies quite a bit. I think it is a wrong perception to expect from m4/3 that everything has to be cheaper. If this is the prime factor, we can forget about the high quality and fast glass, which so many want. If we want fast and quality, we have to pay for it.

As for the price of the Leica lens as a macro, it is within the price range of the competition. Some cost more some less. Where is the problem then?

NuFonaut said:

--
What´s that noise?

From one of the Canon Forums:

'I just came back from my first holiday with the 5D II (I think my wife was there as well). '

Click to expand...

--
Thomas

EFL 100mm and fairly fast. The Oly DSLR users have been using it as a portrait lens for years. It is also on the sharpest lenses you can get.

There is also the Sigma 50mm F1.4 EX DG HSM that will auto focus on micro four thirds. If you want longer then you won't need as fast a lens. Many use the 45-200mm lens for portraits.

richard plumb said:

m4/3 has been out quite a bit longer than NEX, but still doesn't have that many lenses, so it sometimes feels from reading on here that people 'make do' with legacy lenses, or lenses that perhaps aren't as fast as they'd want but thats all they have.

Click to expand...

Of all the systems, m4/3 has by far the highest number of lenses available:

Panasonic:
14-45, 20, 45, 8, 14, 7-14, 14-140, 45-200, 100-300
+ several more announced

Olympus:
14-42, 17, 9-18, 14-150, 40-150, 75-300
+ several announced incl 12mm and 50mm

Noktor and Voigtlander:
50 and 25 both f/0.95 (but MF)

Then there are the 4/3 dslr lenses, several of which focus very well on m4/3, and are compatible in all respects (probably much faster at focus than the A-mounts on NEX). The others will AF, but rather slowly.

I wouldn't like to say there are not 'that many' lenses. I do feel that some lenses are still missing. But this system is developing steadily towards completeness.

The reason why people are using legacy lenses is not (only) as a work-around. For most I'd guess it's also fun to try out several old lenses. They're usually very cheap and give you way more options.

Damien
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bilgy_no1

Bilgy_no1 said:

Of all the systems, m4/3 has by far the highest number of lenses available...

Click to expand...

Last time I counted there were at least 17 native lenses that atuo focused. NEX has 3.

There were also 48 lenses that auto-focused in total. I think for NEX there are 17, but I have yet to hear of any Alpha lens that will focus in under 2 seconds. One review site said they usually take 2-4 seconds. Compare that to the 14-54 II f/2.8-3.5 four thirds lens will focus extremely fast on m43 (as fast a native NEX lens).

One other thing. The fastest native NEX lens is f/2.8 and that is the wide angle. For normal use, the fast lens is f/3.5-5.6. With m43 you have lenses like the 20mm F/1.7.

tgutgu said:

NuFonaut said:

I don´t recommend buying into the system without a native portrait prime.

Click to expand...

Not everybody needs such kind of lens.

Click to expand...

Propably more than the 7th or so lens with 14mm focal lenght

tgutgu said:

tgutgu said:

That´s it basically. No recommendations can be made without one. If they won´t announce one soon i might be gone as soon as something better comes along

Over two years and one of the most important lenses still missing. The Leica is neither bright not affordable so it doens´t count for me.

Click to expand...

To me the Leica is quite affordable. Faster portrait lenses from the competition aren't all cheaper, it varies quite a bit. I think it is a wrong perception to expect from m4/3 that everything has to be cheaper. If this is the prime factor, we can forget about the high quality and fast glass, which so many want. If we want fast and quality, we have to pay for it.

Click to expand...

Well if you think it´s worth its price that is fine by me. The lenses of the competition aren´t all cheaper, but SOME are, for example a nice Nikkor 1,4. It is way brighter and way cheaper. Other lenses are, too. You can get very cheap lenses from canon which are brighter and easily just as sharp at 2.8.

tgutgu said:

As for the price of the Leica lens as a macro, it is within the price range of the competition. Some cost more some less. Where is the problem then?

Click to expand...

Point taken about it being a macro but i´d rater have a portrait prime, which belongs to every system than a not very bright very expensive macro.

M 4/3 doesn´t always has be cheaper than the competition, but when it´s way more expensive and worse that is a problem that we should articulate.

--
What´s that noise?

From one of the Canon Forums:

'I just came back from my first holiday with the 5D II (I think my wife was there as well). '

NuFonaut said:

tgutgu said:

NuFonaut said:

I don´t recommend buying into the system without a native portrait prime.

Click to expand...

Not everybody needs such kind of lens.

Click to expand...

Propably more than the 7th or so lens with 14mm focal lenght

Click to expand...

I agree somehow. The reason is probably that Panasonic made it the "breakpoint" for many lenses, because it is a classical focal lens (28mm).

NuFonaut said:

NuFonaut said:

NuFonaut said:

That´s it basically. No recommendations can be made without one. If they won´t announce one soon i might be gone as soon as something better comes along

Over two years and one of the most important lenses still missing. The Leica is neither bright not affordable so it doens´t count for me.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I bet after two years of the EF system such a lens was missing as well (although I cannot prove it, just a guess).

At least with Canon (I can't tell about Nikon), I have had the problem that with the affordable primes, many of them really had bad build quality (my 2/35mm fell apart) and IQ wasn't tremendous. My impression is that so far, Panasonic primes are more solidly build and have better IQ (the Leica even has IS).

NuFonaut said:

NuFonaut said:

To me the Leica is quite affordable. Faster portrait lenses from the competition aren't all cheaper, it varies quite a bit. I think it is a wrong perception to expect from m4/3 that everything has to be cheaper. If this is the prime factor, we can forget about the high quality and fast glass, which so many want. If we want fast and quality, we have to pay for it.

Click to expand...

Well if you think it´s worth its price that is fine by me. The lenses of the competition aren´t all cheaper, but SOME are, for example a nice Nikkor 1,4.

Click to expand...

In Germany, the Leica costs 799,- €. The two 1.4/85mm Nikkor lenses cost more than 1200,- € ! Only the 1.8/85mm is around 400,- €. The Canon counterpart is 359,- €. On the other hand the 2.0/135mm cost 1099,- €, the 2.8/135mm SF 419,- €. The Nikon Micro Nikkor 2/105mm is 1079,- €. You see, the Leica lens is again somewhere in the middle of all the possible alternatives. Even the Sigma 1.4/85mm is around 1000 €. So it is not absolutely correct to constantly claim that we pay a premium for m4/3 lenses. If you take everything into account, I think the prices are quite appropriate.

Nonetheless, m4/3 currently lacks fast lenses in general. But I would not go as far to say that because of this m4/3 is not recommendable. It still find it amazing how comparatively early Panasonic provided an at least very versatile lens-lineup. Mostly due to the risky (because expensive) release of the 4/7-14mm lens and the quite early release of a macro lens. This is where the other EVIL systems still can dream of. The Panasonic fisheye lens shows that the vendor is willing to release speciality lenses.

NuFonaut said:

It is way brighter and way cheaper. Other lenses are, too. You can get very cheap lenses from canon which are brighter and easily just as sharp at 2.8.

NuFonaut said:

As for the price of the Leica lens as a macro, it is within the price range of the competition. Some cost more some less. Where is the problem then?

Click to expand...

Point taken about it being a macro but i´d rater have a portrait prime, which belongs to every system than a not very bright very expensive macro.

M 4/3 doesn´t always has be cheaper than the competition, but when it´s way more expensive and worse that is a problem that we should articulate.

--
What´s that noise?

From one of the Canon Forums:

'I just came back from my first holiday with the 5D II (I think my wife was there as well). '

Click to expand...

--
Thomas

Everdog said:

EFL 100mm and fairly fast. The Oly DSLR users have been using it as a portrait lens for years. It is also on the sharpest lenses you can get.

Click to expand...

. . . There have also been some persistent rumors that Olympus will eventually introduce a micro 4/3 version of the Zuiko 50/2.

Everdog said:

There are about 48 lenses that will auto-focus on the G2.

Click to expand...

I would be very grateful if you could supply a link/links for more info about this.

Thanks

Mike Boreham said:

Everdog said:

There are about 48 lenses that will auto-focus on the G2.

Click to expand...

I would be very grateful if you could supply a link/links for more info about this.

Click to expand...

. . . I'm not sure where he gets the number 48 but there are at least 37 that will AF along with the Cosina Nokton 25/.95 that is a m4/3 lens but has no AF.

Here's a link to 20 currently available Zuiko lenses availble for std. 4/3 that will also AF to one degree or another with the MMF-2 adapter on a m4/3 camera body:

http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/cpg_digital_slr.asp?section=lens

Here's a link to all 18 of the currently available lenses from Oly, Panny and Cosina that are dedicated m4/3 lenses with the Cosina being manual focus only:

http://panasonic.net/avc/lumix/systemcamera/gms/lens/

It appears that Panasonic no longer lists its std 4/3 lenses but I may be mistaken about that. If they were still listed and if someone knew where to see that list, the number of lenses that can AF on a m4/3 body might possibly be up near the 48 mark after all.

tgutgu said:

tgutgu said:

tgutgu said:

tgutgu said:

Over two years and one of the most important lenses still missing. The Leica is neither bright not affordable so it doens´t count for me.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

tgutgu said:

I bet after two years of the EF system such a lens was missing as well (although I cannot prove it, just a guess).

Click to expand...

I remember when Canon released it - think it was a 100mm F2 (might have been 105mm). Even back then, there was some surprise - "how unexpected, a dedicated portrait prime, not another zoom". Sadly I don't remember exactly which year it was - but I would bet alongside you it was more than 2 years after the introduction of the EOS range.

Everdog said:

One other thing. The fastest native NEX lens is f/2.8 and that is the wide angle. For normal use, the fast lens is f/3.5-5.6. With m43 you have lenses like the 20mm F/1.7.

Click to expand...

And with m43, you have a 3+ year old sensor design, so you need f1:1.7. ;-)

Thanks Tim for those links, and Everdog for the initial info.

I meant something like this:

http://www.google.de/products/catalog?q=nikon+nikkor+1,4+50mm&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:defficial&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&cid=6967674784917596933&ei=A_u5TJ2lCeSW4gb0vez3DQ&sa=X&oi=product_catalog_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CCgQ8wIwAg#

I think considering the price/specs of the lens my point still stands, and strongly at that. A 45mm 1.4 for a price in the higher regions of that link and you won´t hear me complain anymore

tgutgu said:

In Germany, the Leica costs 799,- €. The two 1.4/85mm Nikkor lenses cost more than 1200,- € ! Only the 1.8/85mm is around 400,- €. The Canon counterpart is 359,- €. On the other hand the 2.0/135mm cost 1099,- €, the 2.8/135mm SF 419,- €. The Nikon Micro Nikkor 2/105mm is 1079,- €. You see, the Leica lens is again somewhere in the middle of all the possible alternatives. Even the Sigma 1.4/85mm is around 1000 €. So it is not absolutely correct to constantly claim that we pay a premium for m4/3 lenses. If you take everything into account, I think the prices are quite appropriate.

Click to expand...

--
What´s that noise?

From one of the Canon Forums:

'I just came back from my first holiday with the 5D II (I think my wife was there as well). '

. . . I forgot about the 4 Leica D lenses that Panasonic still sells for std. 4/3 and also there are apparently 12 Sigma lenses for std. 4/3 that AF as well.

Here's the link:

http://panasonic.net/avc/lumix/systemcamera/dslr/lens/index.html

. . . I should have done my homework before posting about this in the beginning. So now, I'm seeing 53 currently available lenses that can AF on a micro 4/3 camera body with the caveat that some of the std. 4/3 lenses are not optimised for contrast detection AF. And in addition there's the Cosina 50/.95 with a m4/3 mount that is only manual focus.

cameron2 said:

Everdog said:

One other thing. The fastest native NEX lens is f/2.8 and that is the wide angle. For normal use, the fast lens is f/3.5-5.6. With m43 you have lenses like the 20mm F/1.7.

Click to expand...

And with m43, you have a 3+ year old sensor design, so you need f1:1.7. ;-)

Click to expand...

Yes, and with that ancient sensor, it's still pretty close to to those enormous APS-C sensors. And now, the GH2 has a new sensor design. Still with a f/1.7 lens...

Sensors are improved and upgraded every few years. But in a camera system, it's as much about the lenses as it is about the bodies.

But you are right. The 20mm f/1.7 puts m4/3 on par, in many ways, with the best APS-C mirrorless systems in terms of high ISO. If you put that lens on a PEN, you get IS and go even further.

Damien

Damien
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bilgy_no1

jack1000 said:

jack1000 said:

jack1000 said:

jack1000 said:

jack1000 said:

Over two years and one of the most important lenses still missing. The Leica is neither bright not affordable so it doens´t count for me.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

jack1000 said:

I bet after two years of the EF system such a lens was missing as well (although I cannot prove it, just a guess).

Click to expand...

I remember when Canon released it - think it was a 100mm F2 (might have been 105mm). Even back then, there was some surprise - "how unexpected, a dedicated portrait prime, not another zoom".

Click to expand...

At launch (or within a few months, October 1987) there was the 135/2.8 SF (68mm f1.4 equivalent for m43 users). The 85L was released in 1989, but the 100/2 - the first consumer portrait lens with USM - finally came along in 1991 (four years into the system).

The 135/2.8 is still in the lineup however, and it is by all accounts an excellent lens. Of course, we are long past the prime... err... of prime lenses, but not having a proper portrait lens on the road-map, even after the introduction of these exotics (fish-eyes from both camps!) seems quite strange.

--
-CW

よしよし、今日も生きのいい魂が手に入ったな

Chez Wimpy said:

. . . snip . . but not having a proper portrait lens on the road-map, even after the introduction of these exotics (fish-eyes from both camps!) seems quite strange.

Click to expand...

good point