flash wrote: Pavel wrote:
.......and that's where the Olympus shines. It shines brightest with it's small primes. The rest is a kludge.
I see your point on this however... Isn't that where every other system shines as well? 5D4 with a 50mm 1.4 balances beautifully. Put a 70-200 on the front and it's not nearly as nice. And to deal with that they offer a grip accesory. Same as Olympus do. The Oly 40-150 and 300 handle much better when the camera is gripped. Without the grip smaller lenses work well. Isn't that exactly why the flagship sports camera (1Dx2 and D5) come gripped out of the box.
I don't know of any system where when the length of the lens extend more than the height of the camera that things aren't compromised regarding handling.
Gordon
p.s. I also agree on the 12-40. Best balanced pro zoom (on the EM1.2) I've used.
Absolutely! But what I was exaggerating a bit to try to illustrate is that at some point the extreme ends don't work for us, especially I meant (but failed) to show if one wants only one system. Sure in a way on could use only a phone and go hog wild on the virtues of portability - but which of us enthusiasts would? Sure someone is there who probably shoots weddings with iPhones - I don't care. Those are grotesque outliers.
The on the full frame with a 1200 ... well, more of us could see that here, but not your normal sort of shooter. It's the extreme at the other end.
And so on ... each level has it's "raison d'etre". I consider Olympus to the the cats pajamas. Why? It was born and bread with an important niche. Small and light, easy to carry and inconspicuous. Of course it's still good with long lenses. Heck. I'd put a Nikon 500 on it every once in a while if it auto-focused and if the sherpas cost less.
But to me ... the drift towards the long zooms takes the honed and focused mission of the micro four thirds platform and dilutes it.
Just a bit anyways. and enough to make it's core argument weaker. Choice is good however and the zooms are popular. On days that I'm grumpy, I wonder if that is why there is no 9 mm f 2.0 Olympus prime. I can see it now. Two inches long, sharp, crisp out to the edges by f 4 and dreamy at F 2.0. Handles like a dream, and I'd get to throw empathetic glances at the out of breath SLR FF toting guy as he rests half way up the hill.
But Olympus is making all those zooms, and putting their best into THEM. I say the glass in ten percent empty, and I'm not happy. Or maybe I just like to disagree. Criticism is important and it's in short supply sometimes.
This is the internet and the eat your cake and still have two slices era you know!
Sep 17, 2017 at 04:08 PM
Previous versions of Pavel's message #14185111 « Olympus E-M1 Mk II »
Criticism is important and it's in short supply sometimes.