Lotusm50 wrote:
Hard for me to imagine someone bothering with this. The sensor is just so small. So much better off with a NEX for about the same money.
So you automatically discount it, just because of the sensor size.
You lose the biggest reason to get the camera (and compromising sensor size) when using an M lens. The good AF tracking. Unless one is a fan of the stylings It'd seem to make more sense to get a m4/3rd or NEX cam for the bump in sensor size since the V1/J1 aren't particularly smaller than the competition. But everyone has their own reasons for their gear purchases.
lxdesign wrote:
So you automatically discount it, just because of the sensor size.
Yes, indeed.
Bigger sensor, with virtually the same size body for the virtually the same price buying other cameras. If you're going to use alt lenses, why bother? As telyt suggests, why waste all that image circle if you don't have to?
Even C-mount lenses are better off with the m4/3rds camera.
I think I'm part to blame here for showing lxdesign in real life what I do with m NEX-5 (soon to be 7, hopefully) and a couple M-mount CV lenses.
That being said, considering the discussion of corner smearing of the CV 25/4 on the NEX-7, would the same lens not function 'better' on the V1 because of the increased crop factor? (Devil's advocate).
hotwire wrote:
I think I'm part to blame here for showing lxdesign in real life what I do with m NEX-5 (soon to be 7, hopefully) and a couple M-mount CV lenses.
That being said, considering the discussion of corner smearing of the CV 25/4 on the NEX-7, would the same lens not function 'better' on the V1 because of the increased crop factor? (Devil's advocate).
For this particular lens both Nex 5N and M43 would be better choices.
Imagemaster wrote:
For those who don't think the V1 makes any sense for much of anything, I don't think they are aware of some of the advantages this camera has over any other camera on the market.
When I receive the FT-1 adapter, I will be testing it on my 300 f4 lens, which will give me a 35mm equivalent of 810mm f4.
That's a nice photo, and indeed, for tele applications it can make sens if the lens resolution holds up. Even a 35mm M turns into a medium tele, so there's plenty of choice
Imagemaster wrote:
For those who don't think the V1 makes any sense for much of anything, I don't think they are aware of some of the advantages this camera has over any other camera on the market.
Is it completely out of the realm of possibility that someone who normally shoots a rangefinder might find him or herself with one of the little Nikons for a travel companion/snapshot camera? And might that person also find themselves curious what their awesome little 35 cron ASPH looks like on the Nikon sensor?
Not everyone buys the mirrorless wonders as a digital rangefinder pacifier.
freaklikeme wrote:
Is it completely out of the realm of possibility that someone who normally shoots a rangefinder might find him or herself with one of the little Nikons for a travel companion/snapshot camera? And might that person also find themselves curious what their awesome little 35 cron ASPH looks like on the Nikon sensor?
Not everyone buys the mirrorless wonders as a digital rangefinder pacifier.
Yeah, if you want your 35 cron to act like a 95 mm tele, sure. How many rangefinder users are into tele lenses?
