 |  |  |  |  |  |
| Old Mate by old shutter bugger from People Photography 2022 | under construction by hozho from Under Construction | Anna's Hummingbird-5575 by vbuhay from Color me Wild - Shades of Green | Date by CarlosU from I get a Long | Pileated Woodpecker in Flight by Fotorequest from A Big Year - Birds 2022 | Bursting with Joy by TaoVerit from Montage |
Shirozina: I don’t hold out much hope for major advances in M43 as to provide customers with better low light/ higher ISO, better DR and better colour it seems easier to design smaller cameras for larger sensors. Now that ‘ mirrorless’ is established the reduced lens size advantage that the M43 system has over full frame systems is still there but it’s not as great as it was. Both these concepts are evident in the S5 + 20-60mm.
Having said that I would love to see a GH6 with a better sensor in terms of DR, high ISO and colour fidelity.
Still lying to yourselves. If I use an 85mm 1.2 on m43 despite the not so shallow depth of field you wont be able to tell. Unless you do a side by side (which is useless in the real world) you wont be able to tell. Someone did this for months on a m43s forum, posted a mix of ff and m43s photos and nobody could say which was which. He even went so far as post a couple of iso 6400 photos and not even then, no one guessed all of them. I'm not gonna sell my sonys any time soon, but its MOSTLY all in our heads
Shirozina: I don’t hold out much hope for major advances in M43 as to provide customers with better low light/ higher ISO, better DR and better colour it seems easier to design smaller cameras for larger sensors. Now that ‘ mirrorless’ is established the reduced lens size advantage that the M43 system has over full frame systems is still there but it’s not as great as it was. Both these concepts are evident in the S5 + 20-60mm.
Having said that I would love to see a GH6 with a better sensor in terms of DR, high ISO and colour fidelity.
No you can't. Anyone that says they can tell the difference between formats in a blind test is lying. To you or worse, to themselves.
RadPhoto: The most superior 50mm F1.2 lens is by far the Nikon Z S lens. The Canon and this Sony one are just OK. Good for their users to have though.
EXkurogane vignetting goes away when stopping down like you do, and the new 1.2 has a fair amount of vignette, more than the zeiss actually.. all the lenses mentioned above have more or less the same ca, including the 1.2, not far from the zeisa, also ca decreases a lot when stacking. Anything else? So far your reasons have been nonsense
RadPhoto: The most superior 50mm F1.2 lens is by far the Nikon Z S lens. The Canon and this Sony one are just OK. Good for their users to have though.
EXkurogane you still don't get it, you gain nothing. Your "high standard" are made up. Youre stopping it down to an aperture where it doesnt matter. The zeiss, the art and even the crappy 50 1.8 put out 4800 lwph at f4 give or take 100 lines. The 1.2 will not do any better. With fast lenses you're paying for performance wide open or close to, otherwise your wasting money.
RadPhoto: The most superior 50mm F1.2 lens is by far the Nikon Z S lens. The Canon and this Sony one are just OK. Good for their users to have though.
@EXkurogane first of all pixel peepers are the saddest most pathetic thing in photography. Second, no its not. At f2.8-4 the difference will be negligible if any between the art, zeiss and the gm, even if you "pixel peep". You're just trying desperately to justify your nonsense
RadPhoto: The most superior 50mm F1.2 lens is by far the Nikon Z S lens. The Canon and this Sony one are just OK. Good for their users to have though.
@EXkurogane you're still making zero sense. If ca and other things get better stopping down, and resolution is the same,, then it's super stupid to spend the money on this to stop it down when you can get the same performance with the zeiss and the sigma. You'll reach optimal and most likely equal performance with all 3 at 2.8.
RadPhoto: The most superior 50mm F1.2 lens is by far the Nikon Z S lens. The Canon and this Sony one are just OK. Good for their users to have though.
@EXkurogane that's a whole lot of words just to confirm how moronic it is. The zeiss at f2.8 will be just as sharp as this, he'll, the sigma at 2.8 will be as sharp. And then focus stacking further makes the argument even more moronic cause you're using the sharpest sections of each. The reason to buy f1.2 lenses is to shoot them at f1.2. Spending this money to get the same results you would with hundreds less is what? Moronic
GrosseFatigue: I had Sony 50mm F1.2 in the 80s and it was already an extraordinary lent but for some screws that had a tendency to get loose screwing up the sharpness at times
Sony made a 50 1.2??? In the 80s????????
RadPhoto: The most superior 50mm F1.2 lens is by far the Nikon Z S lens. The Canon and this Sony one are just OK. Good for their users to have though.
Holy crap people are reaching....youre buying an f1.2 lens with the purpose of stopping it down and then do focus stacking....beyond moronic
RadPhoto: The most superior 50mm F1.2 lens is by far the Nikon Z S lens. The Canon and this Sony one are just OK. Good for their users to have though.
Weeeeeell, Manny Ortiz did a compare of the 3 and nikon was the worst by far
Mzro: "Bird-eye AF is honestly pretty handy for an amateur birder in his backyard."
Seems being amateur birder these days will cost you at least one kidney...
@snapa not really. Some olys have had bird tracking for a while, it does amazing plus a 150-400 f4 lens with a built in 1.25 extender. Thats 1000mm f5.6!!
HenWin: What I found interesting is that the auto focus tracking demo only showed 1 item at a time. It didn't discuss how the tracking worked when the subject was in a group. I find that omission interesting to say the least!
3d tracking from nikon?? Oh no. It doesnt do that. Youre not getting it
deednets: No idea how I would focus any of those lenses except when used on a tripod and me sitting in a gyro seat, mounted to a 4x4 metre concrete block.
I struggle to "nail" focus with my newly acquired 12/2.8 7 Artisans ;-) Sad but true.
How do you struggle hitting focus with a 12mm????? I use to have the 14mm and barely made an effort to focus!! The dof is insane!!
SimenO1: Not compatible with optical TTL viewfinders = no purchase. I prefer that and look elsewhere.
Its not an opinion, evfs are better. I have 2 f.95 lenses and my hit rate Is very high. With focus peaking on faster stuff and magnification on slower stuff. I'm glad the ovf days are coming to an end. Those were the real frustrating missfocus days!!
SimenO1: Not compatible with optical TTL viewfinders = no purchase. I prefer that and look elsewhere.
What camera is that?
il_alexk: What's the point of professional Olympus product line? Size? Weight? Price?
Here is A7RIV vs E-M1X:
https://camerasize.com/compact/#826.660,812.947,ha,f
Now with the 100/150-400 lenses attached. I know, I know, the equivalent focal length on Oly is 800mm, but you get the same from A7RIV simply by cropping the image by the factor of 2.
https://camerasize.com/compact/#826.660,812.947,ha,t
@jon555 it doesnt degrade in the Oly. And barely with the 1.4 on sony. You haven't used them and it shows
il_alexk: What's the point of professional Olympus product line? Size? Weight? Price?
Here is A7RIV vs E-M1X:
https://camerasize.com/compact/#826.660,812.947,ha,f
Now with the 100/150-400 lenses attached. I know, I know, the equivalent focal length on Oly is 800mm, but you get the same from A7RIV simply by cropping the image by the factor of 2.
https://camerasize.com/compact/#826.660,812.947,ha,t
@jon555 again, I have them all. We are not in 2005 anymore. In any case the original post compares it to the 100-400 not the 200-600. The lens size advantage is then clear
il_alexk: What's the point of professional Olympus product line? Size? Weight? Price?
Here is A7RIV vs E-M1X:
https://camerasize.com/compact/#826.660,812.947,ha,f
Now with the 100/150-400 lenses attached. I know, I know, the equivalent focal length on Oly is 800mm, but you get the same from A7RIV simply by cropping the image by the factor of 2.
https://camerasize.com/compact/#826.660,812.947,ha,t
@dpthoughts no to all of that. Maybe 10 years ago but now? I have the 1.4 and 2x for the sony 200-600 and the 1.4 doesn't affect iq at all. The 2x a tiiiny bit but still, nothing. The 1.25 on the oly? Not even a tiny bit. It looks literally the same. The days of kenko converters are long gone.
Digital zoom still sucks, enlargement programs still suck, despite claiming AI. That's the real marketing
il_alexk: What's the point of professional Olympus product line? Size? Weight? Price?
Here is A7RIV vs E-M1X:
https://camerasize.com/compact/#826.660,812.947,ha,f
Now with the 100/150-400 lenses attached. I know, I know, the equivalent focal length on Oly is 800mm, but you get the same from A7RIV simply by cropping the image by the factor of 2.
https://camerasize.com/compact/#826.660,812.947,ha,t
@jon555 you're dead wrong on that. 400mm with the 1.25 on the Olympics you need to crop down to 9mp on the r4 and the 100-400. I HAVE THEM BOTH
brownie314: wait a minute. Is this a $7,000 lens?
Hahaha ha look up 600mm f4 lenses. From any brand. And when you do, know that a LOT of people buy them