Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Alternative Gear & Lenses | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       3       4       end
  

Archive 2012 · Oly 17/1.8
  
 
FlyPenFly
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · Oly 17/1.8


I don't think you have to have one without the other.

Not everything has always have to be small small. Certainly small is a huge benefit for me since I like to carry two OM-D's and NEX-7.

But lets not get carried away and only focus on small when the size of the sensor also allows some special designs at unheard of prices.

This isn't a Pentax Q, small size isn't the only factor.



Nov 07, 2012 at 07:16 PM
bobbytan
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #2 · p.2 #2 · Oly 17/1.8


Heck, if I think like that I would never give up my 5D II and ridiculously obese lenses like the 85L. In terms of IQ nothing beats FF and a high-resolution body. The MAIN reason we go with the OM-D (for most folks anyway) is the compact size and light weight ... and not sacrificing too much IQ and noise.


Nov 07, 2012 at 07:26 PM
FlyPenFly
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #3 · p.2 #3 · Oly 17/1.8


Let's not get carried away. You're making a false equivalence.


Nov 07, 2012 at 07:35 PM
kewlcanon
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #4 · p.2 #4 · Oly 17/1.8


bobby bobby bobby I know you like OM-D so much but man I think you like too much . If you compare with FF I think OM-D is still pretty noisy unless it's for travelling I still want FF + awesome AF .

bobbytan wrote:
Heck, if I think like that I would never give up my 5D II and ridiculously obese lenses like the 85L. In terms of IQ nothing beats FF and a high-resolution body. The MAIN reason we go with the OM-D (for most folks anyway) is the compact size and light weight ... and not sacrificing too much IQ and noise.




Nov 07, 2012 at 07:43 PM
carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #5 · p.2 #5 · Oly 17/1.8


I will be getting one. I would love the Voigtländer, but it makes little sense to me with my E-PL3 or my coming E-PL5.


Nov 07, 2012 at 07:51 PM
CVickery
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #6 · p.2 #6 · Oly 17/1.8


I'll probably be getting one, but I have no illusions about it replacing a 35/1.4 on FF. For me, this is a potential lens for replacing the Fuji X100. The Fuji would be about a F3 equivalent vs and F3.6 for an OM-D with the 17/1.8. I would have preferred an F1.4 lens, but 1.8 will be close enough, particularly at this focal length.


Nov 07, 2012 at 08:12 PM
bobbytan
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #7 · p.2 #7 · Oly 17/1.8


I agree with you and FYI, I don't like that much ... but enough to dump my overweight Canon gear!

I cannot wait for the "pro version" of the OM-D. Hopefully the form factor will remain the same, but with improved buttons and ergonomics ... and focus tracking that actually works!

And yes ... I would like to see the 150/2.8, 300/4 ... and 1.4x TC!

kewlcanon wrote:
bobby bobby bobby I know you like OM-D so much but man I think you like too much . If you compare with FF I think OM-D is still pretty noisy unless it's for travelling I still want FF + awesome AF .





Nov 07, 2012 at 08:14 PM
FlyPenFly
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #8 · p.2 #8 · Oly 17/1.8


carstenw wrote:
I will be getting one. I would love the Voigtländer, but it makes little sense to me with my E-PL3 or my coming E-PL5.


I actually think the E-PL5 is't really worth it over the OM-D.

You lose:

Weather Sealing
2 Control Dials
An excellent EVF
5-Axis IBIS
A few more buttons
Ability to use a battery grip
High resolution OLED screen

Not worth it for what is essentially the cost of an EVF. Maybe if you already had an EVF and the E-PL5 was $500 for the body.

Early reports seem to indicate that the new E-PM2 and E-PL5 screens are worse than the previous generations.



Nov 07, 2012 at 08:14 PM
carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #9 · p.2 #9 · Oly 17/1.8


I am not really trying to think logically about it, I have my D800 for when things get serious, and while I really enjoy my E-PL3, I wasn't smitten by the E-M5 when I tried it in the store. A very capable camera, but I didn't take to it, especially. And I already have the VF-2. I might wait a little until the E-PL5 price drops a tad. I want to get the 17/1.8 and 60 Macro, so I can take my time.


Nov 07, 2012 at 08:18 PM
FlyPenFly
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #10 · p.2 #10 · Oly 17/1.8


I'm just mad at Olympus with this generation.

A+ for using the same awesome sensor.

F for making the E-PM2 lower build quality.
F for making the new body prices kind of nonsense.



Nov 07, 2012 at 08:30 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



michael49
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #11 · p.2 #11 · Oly 17/1.8


Makten wrote:
And it also ruins the whole concept of MFT by being very large and heavy. In my opinion, there is no reason to strive for equivalence, but rather smaller size and lower weight at the same f-stop. So, f/1.4 to f/2.8 as largest aperture is fine, as long as the IQ is good and the lenses small.


Agreed. The small size is the driving force behind m 4/3 for me (plus the excellent tiny fast primes).


But, at least for me, I think I will always own a FF camera. There are things that it can do that my smaller sensor cameras can't, at least not at this point in time.


For example, on a recent kayaking trip I used the 5d2 for shots like this......








Nov 07, 2012 at 09:39 PM
mortyb
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #12 · p.2 #12 · Oly 17/1.8


I think the E-M5 + 75/1.8 would give you a very similar shot.


Nov 07, 2012 at 10:09 PM
bobbytan
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #13 · p.2 #13 · Oly 17/1.8


I was just going to say the same thing!

And so will the yet-to-be-released Panasonic 42.5/1.2 and 150/2.8 lenses!

mortyb wrote:
I think the E-M5 + 75/1.8 would give you a very similar shot.




Nov 07, 2012 at 10:18 PM
Uncle Mike
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #14 · p.2 #14 · Oly 17/1.8


FlyPenFly wrote:
I actually think the E-PL5 is't really worth it over the OM-D.

You lose:

Weather Sealing
2 Control Dials
An excellent EVF
5-Axis IBIS
A few more buttons
Ability to use a battery grip
High resolution OLED screen

Not worth it for what is essentially the cost of an EVF. Maybe if you already had an EVF and the E-PL5 was $500 for the body.

Early reports seem to indicate that the new E-PM2 and E-PL5 screens are worse than the previous generations.


I agree that the E-PL5 will have the weakest sales. In m43, it seems that people either buy the cheapest camera (which is why the E-PL1 has been the best-selling m43) or the best camera (the O-MD E-M5). Within the new generation, the E-PM2 will outsell the E-PL5.



Nov 08, 2012 at 03:16 AM
MarcG19
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #15 · p.2 #15 · Oly 17/1.8


re: the lens, I think one of the commentators on the 43rumors post hit it when he said that, if its US MSRP is $525-$600, one could justify it over the $430 MSRP Panny 17 f/1.8. However, its real price needs to be much lower than MSRP (as is the Panny), otherwise it's not going to sell.

As to the random lens vs. weight and m43 vs FF points that have been otherwise raised in this thread:

I got the Voightlander 25mm f/0.95 used to dabble with, and then resell if I didn't like it. I'd envisaged it primarily as an 4/3 equivalent to the Leica 50mm f/0.95 which many people I know use for street photography. For a good while I was unsure about the lens but am deciding to keep it - the OM-D's "focus peaking and magnification capability make it quite easy to use, I like the ergonomics, and I believe the sharpness at f/1.4 and smaller, bokeh, and subjective picture quality are excellent. I find the distance scale and DOF markings quite useful (fly-by-wire m43 lenses are often hard to manually focus, and I'm not 100% convinced the AF is always right).

If I had to get a 17mm lens, I think it would be the Voightlander over the Olympus (or the Panny 20mm). But again, the use would be Leica-type street photography or landscapes, and IMO despite the slightly difference nature of 35mm EFL and 50mm EFL I don't think another lens is justified.

As for m4/3 and size, any equivalent full frame lens will be much larger (compare the Voightlander f.0.95s to the Leica Noctiluxes), and again I don't think the OM-D + 25mm f/0.95 to be big. Especially compared to an M9+50mm Sumilux or FF DSLR and 50mm f/1.2.

Even better than "not as big", w/ m43 that if I really want to go small, I can just use a tiny pancake (14mm f/2.5 for me) and it's not much bigger than a compact camera - lots of flexibility. [and the smallest m43s are almost compact size with pancake lenses] I find the m4/3's image quality more than good enough for my purposes, but to each their own.

[edited: corrected some typos. Believe it or not English is my first language )

Edited on Nov 08, 2012 at 03:07 PM · View previous versions



Nov 08, 2012 at 08:49 AM
Yakim Peled
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #16 · p.2 #16 · Oly 17/1.8


OM-D + 17/1.8 + 45/1.8 is a minimal set I could live with for a very long time.

BTW, I can't understand how frequent the FF equivalence issue is being mentioned. While true, it has very little relevance. Those who pick MFT as their primary system place small size and light weight above shallow DoF. Thus, such comparisons are often a moot point.

Happy shooting,
Yakim.



Nov 08, 2012 at 12:17 PM
FlyPenFly
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #17 · p.2 #17 · Oly 17/1.8


I use equivalence mainly because I'm more familiar with 35mm and I know exactly how much DoF I will get with certain combinations.

The thing with MFT is that the DoF disadvantage is becoming less and less relavent with these newer F0.95 and F1.2 lenses coming out.



Nov 08, 2012 at 01:17 PM
Jman13
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #18 · p.2 #18 · Oly 17/1.8


Yakim Peled wrote:
OM-D + 17/1.8 + 45/1.8 is a minimal set I could live with for a very long time.

BTW, I can't understand how frequent the FF equivalence issue is being mentioned. While true, it has very little relevance. Those who pick MFT as their primary system place small size and light weight above shallow DoF. Thus, such comparisons are often a moot point.

Happy shooting,
Yakim.


I couldn't agree more. The thing that isn't mentioned in the equivalence arguments is that it ONLY is a disadvantage when it comes to extremely shallow DOF. Shallow DOF can certainly be done with m4/3, even with native lenses now that we have some fast primes, but it just won't be as shallow as on full frame. (interestingly enough, this is not harped on for APS-C sensors, even though it's a bigger margin from APS-C to full frame than m4/3 to APS-C).

For situations where extreme shallow DOF is not the limiting factor, it is a marked ADVANTAGE for micro 4/3. There are many situations where 85mm f/1.2 is way too shallow on full frame for what you want. Let's say you would normally stop down to f/4 for that portrait at 85mm....you'll blur the background, but get the whole face in focus. Well, with Micro 4/3, you can use the Oly 45 at f/2, and you'll get the same look, but with two full stops faster aperture. When the light goes down, you can use much lower ISO. And, since m4/3 has come to a point where it's NOT two full stops worse that full frame in the ISO department, (about a stop or so), you'll actually get a slightly cleaner image in these situations with the m4/3 gear.

I'd argue this situation comes up just as much as the 'need ultra-shallow DOF' situations for most people.

It's not just in portraiture either. When shooting hand held architecture or landscape work: being able to shoot at f/4 or f/5.6 rather than f/8 or f/11 can make all the difference between shooting at ISO 200 and ISO 800.



Nov 08, 2012 at 01:52 PM
bobbytan
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #19 · p.2 #19 · Oly 17/1.8


I am not one of those who would rather have only 3 eyelashes or one eye in focus. Super-thin DOF is actually annoying to me. I must admit although I've owned the 85L for a very long time I never shot at f1.2 because (a) the DOF is just too shallow, (b) it's not as sharp wide open, and (c) your keeper rate is much lower because of misfocus.

The 45/1.8 and 75/1.8 on the other hand is very sharp wide open. And next year you will be able to get the 42.5/1.2 lens. More fast lenses will follow without a doubt.



Nov 08, 2012 at 02:16 PM
httivals
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #20 · p.2 #20 · Oly 17/1.8


I agree with Bobby's comment. Indeed, the 75mm f1.8 and OMD-e5 is the best portrait + camera lens I've used. Because the contrast detect eye priority is so accurate, I'm able to shoot it wide open and get spectacular, consistent results. On the Canon 5dI and 5dII, I could never shoot the 85mm f1.8 with autofocus wide open hope to consistently have the nearest eye in focus.

The 45mm f1.8 and 25mm f1.4 are also great for portraits. I also am looking forward to the 42.5mm f1.2 lens.



Nov 08, 2012 at 03:25 PM
1      
2
       3       4       end




FM Forums | Alternative Gear & Lenses | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       3       4       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Reset password