What really doesn't make any sense is you commenting on things you have no clue whatsoever. Have you ever try any of these combinations? I'm pretty sure you didn't. On the other hand, I had, and I had absolutely no problem using 300mm Pro on a Pen F. I use 12-100 Pro on a Pen F all the time.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Sigma 56 1.4 Review on ephotozine
- Thread starter Rombo
- Start date
Having a big, heavy body to counterbalance heavy lenses makes sense if the handle you're holding the camera by is at the common Center of Gravity, ahead of the body's mass.
Modern cameras aren't designed that way, though.
You can, however, simply support the lenses at their balance point with your left hand, the way cartoon illustrations in film SLR manuals have taught people how to do it for decades...
No reason why a GM1 mounted on a 300mm/f4 has any problem in this scenario. You've even got a grip in the right place at the tripod collar if you want it...
Last edited:
I thought this is the M43 forum. So yes, for most people here on this forum, FF means they have to get a FF body first to enjoy the advantages of a 1,8/85mm lens.
Also I thought we were talking about FF cameras. I understand the 2006 Canon 20D has a 6.2MP APSc sensor.
As for me it would take at least a D610 or A7.2, to lure me away from M43. Well, maybe a really cheap D700 or 5D2, just to get a feeling of FF, as a second body might be tempting.
I think someone not invested in M43 also would rather try to get a modern and a FF camera, which however would cost quite a bit: the A7.3 with 1,8/85 is EUR 2960 or about USD 2600.
But I agree in your last point: I am not interested in any of the F1.2 lenses because of their weight and price, and this makes the Sigma so very interesting.
Peter
RobbieBear
Senior Member
- Messages
- 2,356
- Reaction score
- 1,815
Wait till Tom reads this! He uses one regularly on a GM5!
Of course, those cameras exist...I suspect amongst older models still in use yoy may well be right. But there are no shortage of higher MP FF cameras , Pentax, Nikon and Sony have 36mp models going back to 2012 in the case of Nikon. Sony has a couple of 42mp models on the market , Nikon has the 45mp D850 and Z7 , and Canon has a couple of 50mp cameras.To be fair, though, LensTip does not test with the newest, densest M4/3 sensors, either.You can't really say that about the lens just based on the lenstip data as the sensor densities are so different. With the 1Ds3 on the Canon and D3x on the Nikkorm, the 85mm f/1.8 lenses are actually sharper wide open, in terms of lp/ph, than the Olympus 45 f/1.2. Considering the Canon is a nearly 30 year old film lens, that's not too shabby.I won't lie, Harold, your blanket policy ("NEVER") really doesn't make sense here.I personally believe that a F1.2 for a portrait lens is NEVER the best choice regardless of the sensor size . Most of the times, the resolution and contrast is pretty low at such aperture
A f1.4 or F1.7 is a much better option in terms of size AND weight AND price AND usability of the largest aperture
But of course Olympus like most other brands is influenced by the crowd who thinks that every portrait they take must have blurry ears
Harold
The O45/f1.2 in question has twice the resolution wide open at f1.2 as the Canon and Nikon 85mm/f1.8 lenses do (wide open 1 full stop slower, at f1.8).
The 24.4MP offered by the D3x is still overwhelmingly the most common FF sensor resolution.
But overwhelmingly the most popular and best-selling FF cameras on the market are the 20MP 6D, the 22MP 5DIII, the 26MP 6DII, the 24MP D610 and D750, and the 24MP A7 II and A7 III.
We'll see how sales pan out between the 24MP Z6 and the 30MP EOS R.
Everything much more expensive than ~$2000 (below which, all cameras are <26MP cameras) is functionally a rounding error in terms of sales and market share, with the sole possible exception of the 30MP 5D IV.
Last edited:
Skeeterbytes
Forum Pro
Here you go!
GM5+300 Pro+handsome model
Some forget that it's okay to have fun with their gear.
Cheers,
Rick
p.s. 17/1.2 is fine on the GM5, no issues whatsoever.
--
Equivalence and diffraction-free since 2009.
You can be too; ask about our 12-step program.
RobbieBear
Senior Member
- Messages
- 2,356
- Reaction score
- 1,815
I am not going to compare this lens to FF alternatives.
I am not going to compare this lens to any other lens in the current MFT catalogue.
I am not going to comment on the linked review.
I am going to say that this lens is another choice for the MFT platform...and in my book that's a good thing.
I am not going to compare this lens to any other lens in the current MFT catalogue.
I am not going to comment on the linked review.
I am going to say that this lens is another choice for the MFT platform...and in my book that's a good thing.
Mark Ransom
Veteran Member
You're probably mostly right, but I can tell you that the 36MP Pentax K-1 and K-1 II are under $2000.
True. But you may have identified the two lowest-selling cameras in the entire market...
Brian Thomas
Leading Member
as 11 people approved this, it is clearly well-understood, but, alas, not by me. -- Are you implying that the results will be worse?
Tony and Chelsea Northrup made a big ripple on the internet with Tony's editorializing that you shouldn't use full frame lenses on a cropped sensor. As pretty much all our Sigma branded m4/3 lenses might fall into this category, this has implications for us, IF it is true.
However, I have always suspected that Tony Northrup was just generalizing from some principles he only half understood (which is more understanding that I have). Nonetheless, experientially, this doesn't seem true. For, example on the Sony platform many Individuals think that the FE 28mm f2 full-frame lens is one of the best options for the Sony cropped sensor cameras even rivaling their most legendary lens, the Zeiss 24mm 1.8.
Sigma would surely adjust their optical design for the different stack thickness, no? There are more M4/3 bodies out there than APS-C E-mount bodies, and those are the only two mounts Sigma sells these lenses for...
RobbieBear
Senior Member
- Messages
- 2,356
- Reaction score
- 1,815
But the Sigma branded lenses are not FF. They are designed for a cropped sensor APS-C.
Not sure if that ties with Northrups statement.
Mark Ransom
Veteran Member
APS-C is a 1/1.5 crop of FF. m4/3 is a 1/1.3 crop of APS-C. Not the same, but not dissimilar either.
RobbieBear
Senior Member
- Messages
- 2,356
- Reaction score
- 1,815
I always thought that it would be advantageous to have a larger lens circle rather than an issue. If folks could chime in as to why it would be a problem (other than the obvious lens size) I would welcome the info.
Historically, lens designers have targeted a desirable output resolution as the driving goal. With larger film or larger sensors, you need much lower linear resolving power to achieve those output resolutions.
To achieve the same perceived sharpness, a lens projecting onto an FF sensor needs only 1/2 the resolving power of a lens for 4/3 sensors, and only 2/3 the resolving power of a lens for APS-C sensors.
Obviously, it's possible to achieve the same linear resolving power on those large sensor lenses. But that requires bigger, heavier, more expensive lenses and they just haven't been deemed necessary in the past, so they didn't bother with it.
No. I work too hard for my money. Have a Canon FF and 85 1.8 already that can do anything these uber expensive f1.2 lenses can do. Why would I waste money on these?
pic and a good looking dog. I'm gonna guess you don't normally use that lens on a GM5. Nothing wrong with having fun with strange combinations, but I don't think anybody buys a 300 4 without having a larger body than a GM5. That doesn't preclude them from having some fun like you obviously did, but I'll bet the GM5 isn't your only body.Here you go!
GM5+300 Pro+handsome model
Some forget that it's okay to have fun with their gear.
Cheers,
Rick
p.s. 17/1.2 is fine on the GM5, no issues whatsoever.
--
Jonathan
Last edited:
No doubt. No secret of Tom's love of the GM5. I feel very similar and write about the virtues of my GM1, but I would get something bigger for one of those lenses but that's just me. Still, does anyone think someone buys one of these f1.2 lenses only owning something like a GM5? I doubt that.
--
Jonathan
Last edited:
My goof up. Going back in time for some reason. I shoot a 6D now and with that slight change everything I said is valid.
It is. This is where we agree. Peter
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum