I don\'t agree with your assumption that most m43 users are adapting lenses.
No, no. Not \"most µ4/3 users...\" but rather: \"most µ4/3 users here.\" Meaning here in the alt sub-forum. There\'s almost no persons posting shots with native lenses here. Probably because this is the alt. forum. And that\'s all I meant.
For sure adaptees or adaptors are probably below the 10th percentile - or there-abouts anyway! \"Why would they\" is pretty fraking obvious tho:
There\'s 2 or 3 times better IQ to be had.
There are equal or better lenses in IQ for one tenth the cost - and sometimes even less.
They appreciate the build quality and/or the historical sense of older MF lenses - as opposed to the plastic junk offerings from the mirrorless makers.
Perhaps like the OP here they already have the lenses they like and feel the mirrorless system is interim in their overall plans.
They collect (or horse-trade for profit) lenses as a hobby (slash side-job) and it\'s just a lot of fun to use them - on any system.
The length to resolution superiority factor! A 200/2.0 shoots like a 400/2.0 in terms of speed and focal length, costs 1/50th what a 400/2.8 would, and is easily as good or better than cropping the centers from the much more expensive D800. To match the OM-D or GH2 etc., to a FF camera in this way the FF camera would need to be over 64 megapixels.
Any combination of the above and probably 5 other things I\'m not even thinking of.
Aug 11, 2012 at 01:30 PM
Previous versions of Bifurcator's message #10874737 « "Best" Mirrorless Camera with Viewfinder? »
And that\'s all I meant.
are probably below the 10th percentile - or there-abouts anyway! \"Why would they\" is pretty fraking obvious tho: