^ Hrm strange, maybe so, but I'd do more testing. Perhaps your adapter or lens is giving interference pattern in some colors? (a type of banding I think?)
I've now completed the task of building a nice, small and versatile MFT set of lenses for the OM-D and I'm very pleased. I started out with the 20/1.7 which I'll probably sell. It's good, but not good enough to let me comfortably use the OM-D instead of a camera with larger sensor. So I got the PL 25/1.4 and was immediately stunned by how good MFT can be. I decided right away to ditch the NEX-5N with expensive M lenses, and this week I got the Olympus 12/2.0 and 45/1.8 as well.
The three first are shot with the 45 stopped down to ~2.8-4.
The local contrast is a tad lower than with the PL 25, which is fine considering the low price and the extremely small size. Sharpness and color is great though.
The 12/2 is a "better" lens, but I haven't gotten used to the AOV yet. This was wide open.
Last time I had a Nikon D700 I used an old 24/2.8 AI, and I swear the 12/2.0 is better wide open than the AI is at f/4, which gives "true equivalence" across the formats. Love it!
Yeah, those three lenses, plus the 75/1.8 (which is actually better than all of them sharpness wise) and the Panny 7-14 are the real gems of the format. The Panny 8mm fisheye is also spectacular and the Voigtlander 17.5 f/0.95 surprised the heck out of me. There is some really outstanding glass for the format, and it's the biggest strength of m4/3 IMO.
Jman13 wrote:
Yeah, those three lenses, plus the 75/1.8 (which is actually better than all of them sharpness wise) and the Panny 7-14 are the real gems of the format. The Panny 8mm fisheye is also spectacular and the Voigtlander 17.5 f/0.95 surprised the heck out of me. There is some really outstanding glass for the format, and it's the biggest strength of m4/3 IMO.
I agree and the available range of lenses makes up for the smaller format when comparing to the NEX cameras. I've actually got the Samyang 7.5/3.5 just for fun and it's great as well. I think I'll stay away from the zooms and the 75 since I want the system to be as small as possible, and I'm not interested in longer tele photography. The fast Voigtländers are highly interesting, but I've got a larger camera for that sort of look.
Edit: For roughly the same price, you can get either a D700 and ZF 35/1.4, or an OM-D with 12, 25 and 45 mm. I have this and I'd choose the latter combo any day if I couldn't have both.
Martin - It's good to hear your assessment on this camera. I still own an NEX-7 and recently got an OM-D and I'm trying to decide which way I would rather go. I Love the OM-D's autofocus for street shooting but also shoot a fair amount of static images, as you know. I'm not ready to give up on my Canon 5DIII and Zeiss glass just yet and I have a fair investment in NEX-7/alt lenses as well.
One question for you, are you using the AF on the OM-D or MF. If the latter, how do you find the ease of MF versus the NEX?
I really want the 12/2, but I know I'd probably never use it...just a bit too wide for me for prime purposes. Same thing with the 75/1.8 - both spectacular lenses but not what I need in prime range.
I'm really hoping Olympus (or Pany, if they can keep it reasonably small) will release a 17/2 or even 17/1.4.
As soon as one is released, they'll join my 25/1.4 and 45/1.8 in prime trinity bliss.
I'll keep the 12-50 kit for travel/macro and I've also got coming the Pany 14/2.5 for screwing around with my incoming G1X
Some quick shots from today. First two are with the Panny 7-14. Went for a retro/cross-processed look for (what I think are) obvious reasons. Last is with Oly 75/1.8 @ f/4:
Thanks. Yeah, it is Instagram-ish. I debated doing it, but it just works with the subject. Honestly, the modern crisp saturated look with that van just doesn't work...it feels anachronistic.
rji2goleez wrote:
Martin - It's good to hear your assessment on this camera. I still own an NEX-7 and recently got an OM-D and I'm trying to decide which way I would rather go. I Love the OM-D's autofocus for street shooting but also shoot a fair amount of static images, as you know. I'm not ready to give up on my Canon 5DIII and Zeiss glass just yet and I have a fair investment in NEX-7/alt lenses as well.
One question for you, are you using the AF on the OM-D or MF. If the latter, how do you find the ease of MF versus the NEX?...Show more →
I guess I'll pose the question to all. With lenses such as the PL25, Oly45 and so on, are you using AF or MF most of the time?
Jman13 wrote:
Thanks. Yeah, it is Instagram-ish. I debated doing it, but it just works with the subject. Honestly, the modern crisp saturated look with that van just doesn't work...it feels anachronistic.
Instagram or not, looks awesome How wide were you with that full-body shot? I keep telling myself I don't need the 7-14, but shots like this erode that argument
The full van shot was at 9mm. The first one is at 11mm. I love the 7-14. Very versatile...VERY wide when you need it, and a great optic. It was the lens that pushed me over the edge to do a complete switch to m4/3 from my full frame gear.
I have "the Zeiss" trio (21, 50, 100) for Nikon FF ---- now have the OMD with the kit, 25 and 45 - I AF everything on the OMD - it gets the job done and done right 95% of the time - and if not, I just simply take another shot and do a better job of telling it where I want the focus! Have not had to MF one time with the OMD!
