Comparing Olympus 4/3lenses to FX "Full Frame" offerings

Started Jan 25, 2014 | Discussions thread
Great Bustard Forum Pro • Posts: 42,002
Re: It's all about the lenses

dave gaines wrote:

Messier Object wrote:

Hi Dave,

I bet you didn't expect the Equvalence evangelists and denyers to have a battle in your thread.
Once again, neither side made any ground on the other, and hopefully they'll withdraw before the MODs shut down the thread

Thanks Peter,

Yes, what a bunch of hooey. There's no winning this argument. I don't know why anyone responds to GB and others when they raise this subject.

Typically, they respond to show a gross ignorance of how both aperture and lens sharpness relate across formats.

It's sounds like a broken record (for you strictly digital age kids that's an LP vinyl disc used for music).

It does, indeed.

This thread was really about lens IQ, fast glass, focal length options and the advantages of 4/3 on the long end.

Which, ironically enough, is exactly the topic Equivalence discusses.

Olympus shooters should know they have lots of options with just 20 good lenses. Some of these are redundant between SG, HG and SHG. So they really only need 10 or 12 to handle every contingency available.

Which is true for basically every ILC format.

Since getting my 5D3 just over a year ago I've slowly built up my Canon FX system without any thought or reference to my 4/3 kit . I just know what I want and need to get the best out of the 5D.

This is a good approach. I haven't tried to replicate the focal lengths so much as the IQ and the FOV options. I've covered 14 mm to 200 mm with 3 good zooms that have slightly different ranges than the Olympus. Now I need a lens for UWA that accepts filters. That's a tough nut to crack with different solutions in Nikon FX.

Like the 7-14 / 4, both the Nikon 14-24 / 2.8G and Tokina 16-28 / 2.8 cannot accept screw-in filters, but perhaps something like this DIY technique for the 7-14 / 4:

will work.

As for Oly, I've not sold any of it, but I know for sure that I'll never buy another Olympus lens, however I just might buy the next E-Mx if it handles better and does a better job with PDAF. Having the ZD150 and ZD300 means I still have a hand in the Olympus 4/3 game and still want to get a better sensor behind my 2 SHG primes.

I could not afford to keep both systems with the caliber of lenses I had and wanted from Nikon. If I had the long tele's you have I might have kept those and the E-5 too. I've given up on having a fast tele with FX. It's just too expensive, more than an Olympus 300 mm f/2.8.

It's a shame that there is no 600 / 5.6 VR for FF -- it would probably be quite a hit.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow