Prev: Waterproof case for A570IS or Waterproof Camera
Next: Dpreview. Strapped for real news, or in sales pitch mode?
From: nospam on 25 Jan 2010 17:24
In article <hjl1vb$oom$1(a)reader1.panix.com>, Jeremiah DeWitt Weiner
<jdw(a)panix.com> wrote:

> IMHO, you're half-right. The 35-100 f/2 is indeed huge, which is as
> you say perhaps strange for a system that was supposed to enable
> smaller, lighter lenses. (I rented both the 14-35 and 35-100 f/2 lenses
> a while back, so I do have some personal knowledge of it.) However,
> consider this: no competing company offers a direct replacement, at any
> size, weight, or price point.

incorrect.

4/3rds has a 2 stop noise penalty due to its size, all things being
equal. thus, a 35-100mm f/2 lens on 4/3rds is equivalent to a 70-200mm
lens f/4 on full frame and those lenses are much smaller, lighter and a
lot less expensive. a 70-200mm f/2.8 has an effective one stop
advantage over the 4/3rds lens, yet it is *still* smaller, lighter and
less expensive.

plus, the competing nikon and canon lenses include stabilization,
something the olympus lens does not have. supporters of in-camera
stabilization keep saying how 'expensive' putting stabilization is in a
lens, yet despite that, those lenses are actually a *less* expensive
solution.

> The most similar products are at least a
> full stop slower.

a full stop faster, or the same effective stop and substantially
lighter, smaller and cheaper.

> The fact that the lens is as big as it is on 4/3
> may suggest why it doesn't have direct competitors on other systems:
> they'd be even huger.

it needs to be an f/1.4 to match what's available on a full frame.
From: nospam on 25 Jan 2010 17:27
In article <u55sl5lst3ko9fi7sl3c0tt2n8v1cci72u(a)4ax.com>, Bruce
<docnews2011(a)gmail.com> wrote:

> The Zuiko 35-100mm f/2 gives the equivalent angle of view and maximum
> aperture of a 70-200mm f/2 on a full frame DSLR, or a 55-160mm f/2 on
> an APS-C DSLR.

nope, 4/3rds has a 2 stop penalty, so it's equivalent to f/4 on full
frame.

> The very wide maximum aperture helps obtain faster shutter speeds and
> partly compensates for the excess depth of field of Four Thirds when
> compared with an f/2.8 lens of the same range of angles of view on
> full frame. It fully compensates for the excess depth of field of
> Four Thirds when compared with APS-C, all other things being equal.

it helps to use a lower iso to compensate for the increased noise of
the smaller sensor.

> As with all the pro grade Zuiko digital lenses, it is a stunning
> performer. The nearest comparison would be the Nikon G and Canon L
> 70-200mm f/2.8 pro lenses. Optically, the Zuiko performs better than
> either of them.

even when those are set to f/4, to match ? you wouldn't want to bias
the results, now would you.
From: Cascalheira on 25 Jan 2010 17:36
On 2010-01-25 22:27:19 +0000, nospam said:

> In article <u55sl5lst3ko9fi7sl3c0tt2n8v1cci72u(a)4ax.com>, Bruce
> <docnews2011(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> The Zuiko 35-100mm f/2 gives the equivalent angle of view and maximum
>> aperture of a 70-200mm f/2 on a full frame DSLR, or a 55-160mm f/2 on
>> an APS-C DSLR.
>
> nope, 4/3rds has a 2 stop penalty, so it's equivalent to f/4 on full
> frame.
>
>> The very wide maximum aperture helps obtain faster shutter speeds and
>> partly compensates for the excess depth of field of Four Thirds when
>> compared with an f/2.8 lens of the same range of angles of view on
>> full frame. It fully compensates for the excess depth of field of
>> Four Thirds when compared with APS-C, all other things being equal.
>
> it helps to use a lower iso to compensate for the increased noise of
> the smaller sensor.
>
>> As with all the pro grade Zuiko digital lenses, it is a stunning
>> performer. The nearest comparison would be the Nikon G and Canon L
>> 70-200mm f/2.8 pro lenses. Optically, the Zuiko performs better than
>> either of them.
>
> even when those are set to f/4, to match ? you wouldn't want to bias
> the results, now would you.

What is the sense of comparing cameras that have such a big difference
in price? Would you compare the entry level Canon/Nikon full frame to
a top notch Hasselblad?
the fair comparison here is to cameras that have around the same price
and in this case with APS-C sensors.

--

A. Cascalheira

------------
http://www.flickr.com/photos/cascalheira

From: nospam on 25 Jan 2010 18:03
In article <00c5076d$0$11452$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com>, Cascalheira
<cascalheira(a)gmail.com> wrote:

> the fair comparison here is to cameras that have around the same price
> and in this case with APS-C sensors.

b&h prices of a typical high end kit:

olympus e3 $1061
olympus 35-100 $2050
olympus 14-35 $1854
total: $4965

canon 5d ii $2500
70-200 f/4 is $1189
28-70 $1339
total $5028

a whopping difference of $63.
From: Cascalheira on 27 Jan 2010 07:36
On 2010-01-25 23:03:10 +0000, nospam said:
>
> b&h prices of a typical high end kit:
>
> olympus e3 $1061
> olympus 35-100 $2050
> olympus 14-35 $1854
> total: $4965
>
> canon 5d ii $2500
> 70-200 f/4 is $1189
> 28-70 $1339
> total $5028
>
> a whopping difference of $63.

When you say it like that, i must agree with you. And the 5D mark II is
a camera i just love.
But the thing is: as you can easily tell from my flickr account im far
from be a professional photgrapher. Some time ago i bought a cheap
Olympus e-510 kit with a Zuiko 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 and a 40-150mm f/4-5.6
(around 550€). Soon i intend to buy a Zuiko 11-22mm f/2.8-3.5. If i was
waiting to be able to spare 2500 us$ for a camera body i would probably
not get it anytime soon (my work is not related in any way with
photography). But with a cheap camera, im already having some fun
making photos, i will be able to buy a new lenses soon, and taking in
account the prices you showed up i know i will probably end up spending
more then i would if i just bought a full frame 5d mkII, but i don't
regret my choice at all, as other way i wouldn't even probably have a
camera in the first place.

--

A. Cascalheira

------------
http://www.flickr.com/photos/cascalheira

First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Prev: Waterproof case for A570IS or Waterproof Camera
Next: Dpreview. Strapped for real news, or in sales pitch mode?