Are m4/3 cameras too expensive when you…

Started Apr 30, 2013 | Discussions thread
AndyGM Contributing Member • Posts: 698
Re: Are m4/3 cameras too expensive when you…

tron555 wrote:

… Consider how many expensive lenses are absolutely needed, just to cover your basic needs?

I have been considering the purchase of an Olympus E-PL5, then; I came across this thread with a post like this:
It seems like very advance photographers (unlike myself) are spending thousands of dollars on very expensive lenses. After acquiring them, they are noticing these lenses are only sharp at certain apertures and focal lengths. It seems like getting sharp images from corner to corner throughout the focal range is basically impossible on any m4/3 lens! I understand that is also true of all other types of interchangeable lens, but it seems even prevalent with m4/3 lenses. It has made me reconsider (or at least put on hold) my purchase of the E-PL5. Coming from fixed lens cameras in the past, I have never experienced these kinds of issues, costs and probably aggravations when not getting sharp images. I have two very important questions to ask, and I hope someone here can answer them for me and maybe others. If I do purchase the Olympus E-PL5, are there two additional (reasonably priced) lenses I can purchase (1 short/1 long) besides the kit lens that will give me approximately 17mm to 140/150mm range? If the answer is yes, will the total cost be less than $1000 for the entire system? Any help will be very much appreciated!

I do not see how you came to these conclusions based on the post you linked to, or even the whole thread that post is from. The Olympus 45mm lens they are discussing in that thread is $349, you'd have to buy six extra lenses of that price to get to your thousands (plural) of Dollars. To cover the focal length range you mentioned, you only have to buy one extra lens, and it is cheaper than $359. Heck, you can buy a kit that has the E-PL5, the 14-42 lens it usually comes with, and the 40-150mm lens, all included in the box. And its $100 Dollars more that the single lens kit, so I'm told. Both lenses together more than cover your 17-150mm range.

When they were discussing how sharp the 45mm lens is at certain apertures, it is all relative. I am willing to bet that even at the apertures where the 45mm is least sharp it is still sharper than the fixed lens on the camera you are using at the moment. Its just that most people on this forum are gear geeks, and they want to wring every last bit of sharpness out of the lenses they have. All lenses, for any camera, have "sweet spots" for sharpness, and usually when the aperture is fully open, the sharpness is lower than when you reduce the aperture a little bit. Notice I said lower and not low, as I said, it is all relative. Oh, and there will not have been discussion of "certain focal lengths" because that lens has just one focal length, 45mm. That's it. It is not a Zoom lens, it is a Prime lens.

The most common use for the 45mm lens is for taking portraits, and most of the discussion we have on this forum are about how this lens is too sharp for this purpose, and how wives and girlfriends have demanded that "soft focus" is added to the image afterwards in Photoshop because the lens is so sharp it is showing up every little imperfection in their skin!

 AndyGM's gear list:AndyGM's gear list
Olympus PEN E-PL1 Olympus PEN E-PL3 Olympus E-M1 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 14-150mm 1:4-5.6 +4 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow