glassoholic

You appear to own the 75 1.8... that's a great start for concerts... obviously a tele could be both a good and a bad thing depending on where you are shooting from and what composition you want. F2 ...

Nice set of pics and I feel like doing a walkabout now! The RX10IV is amazing... until you want to shoot ultra wide or fisheye, or a f1.2 portrait lens or want a coat pocketable body plus small ...

Its back to the 1970's and 1980's when every back cover of National Geographic featured Olympus and Formula 1 beamed the Olympus name to millions of TV viewers around the world... I'm getting all ...

Maybe... maybe not. The Olympus name is not up there with Canon and Nikon to start with. Lumix is Panasonic. Customers are told who Lumix is and customers will be told OMDS is/ was Olympus... for ...

Its true that brands have to pay to be showcased in large stores. That started in audio visual showrooms in the 1980's and became more common from there. OMDS probably has other things they are ...

Back in late 1980's, after I completed my photography degree, with my major being Fashion Photography, I joined a pool of photographers shooting for 4 different magazines. The other 3 ...

I think bobn2 has it covered with the m43 FFD (flange focal distance) discussion... an 8mm m43 prime will end up being large and expensive compared to the physics of the RF FFD and their 16mm design. ...

Love your pics!

I have chosen a film simulation from the DXO Film Pack plug in, Fuji Superia from memory, and use portrait toning for people and landscape toning with Fuji Velvia simulation for everything else. I ...

Nice! Sometimes a non defished or partially defished FE shot looks better than a rectilinear lens shot.

If I don't need to use f1.2 to get a fast enough shutter speed, and I can use base ISO on a tripod, say like landscape work, then a 45mp or better, larger sensor, starts to make sense to me ...

If you need f2.8 to get a 1/250 shutter speed for theatre work (at say 3200 ISO), a roughly equivalent IQ from a FF would be f5.6 at 12800 ISO to get 1/250 shutter speed. I know you know that, and ...

Good point! I had forgotten that DSLR designs struggled to focus slower than f5.6 lenses... for sure the slower lenses coming from Canon are because they can AF now with mirrorless.

Good outcome! Now to be fair, you should ask the forum moderator to add the following to your OP title "bad copy" or something similar, so that potential purchasers don't have to read all the way ...

Thanks... I was wondering about that. Now, generally, ultra wide angle lenses have been complex and good, fast ones, really complex and expensive. The new Canon is so small and relatively simple ...

I have it and it is very good. However, the discussion is about rectilinear lenses. Defished, the results from the Fisheye are nice but not as good as a rectilinear design would be. If you defish ...

As I have a 8-18mm Panaleica, and a 8mm FE Oly Pro, I have no reason "to leave m43" for not having a 8mm f1.4 Prime (equivalent to the new Canon 16mm f2.8)... the focal lengths of m43 ultra wide ...

Indeed, I read a comment that Canon (RF FF) is competing "downwards" with equivalence. I don't think they are looking over their shoulder at m43 worried about losing sales... they are simply ...

You are debating which to purchase... there is feedback on this forum from actual users. Some have owned or own the 300 Pro and one of the super zooms, or have even compared the two super zooms as ...

The new Canon 16mm f2.8 (8mm m43) is tiny and cheap and has AF. It's a hundred USD less than a manual focus m43 Laowa 7.5mm and half an inch shorter. The widest AF rectilinear prime we have is an ...