Prev: Work as a photographer - question!
Next: It's official. Olympus no longer makes good lenses
From: Bruce on 24 Jun 2010 15:06
On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 10:04:23 -0700 (PDT), RichA <rander3127(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
>
>... 14-150mm zoom. They all suck.


You have presented no evidence that the 14-150mm zoom sucks.

From: Peter on 24 Jun 2010 16:38
"Bruce" <docnews2011(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
news:c4b726hr2q6uafoidlvfcesnh739186jci(a)4ax.com...
> On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 10:04:23 -0700 (PDT), RichA <rander3127(a)gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>>... 14-150mm zoom. They all suck.
>
>
> You have presented no evidence that the 14-150mm zoom sucks.


And you sir, have presented no evidence of your claimed connection with
Olympus.



--
Peter

From: SMS on 25 Jun 2010 10:05
RichA wrote:
> The 25mm f2.8, the 17mm f2.8, the 14-42 collapsing kit lens, now the
> 14-150mm zoom. They all suck. Olympus used to be the poster-child
> for good lenses, even their kit lenses shon and their pro and top pro
> lenses were phenomenal.

It's a different world. They made the decision to not compete against
Nikon and Canon in the pro and prosumer markets when they went the 4:3
route for their digital SLRs, basing that decision not only on the huge
costs of competing in that market but on the fact that the
consumer-grade market is far larger. What they didn't realize is that
even most consumers look at the big picture (no pun intended) and want
to buy into a system that has a future. Now that 4:3 has failed
commercially, Olympus is betting on Micro 4:3, but the early equipment
has been disappointing to put it mildly.
From: Ray Fischer on 26 Jun 2010 03:52
RichA <rander3127(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>The 25mm f2.8, the 17mm f2.8, the 14-42 collapsing kit lens, now the
>14-150mm zoom. They all suck.

In rich's world everybody MUST pay $5000 for each lens in order to
meet his standards for quality. Lenses must have the finest optics
and not contain any plastic, even if it means that they weight five
pounds and can only zoom by a factor of two.

--
Ray Fischer
rfischer(a)sonic.net

From: Rich on 27 Jun 2010 16:12
rfischer(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote in news:4c25b1d0$0$1593
$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net:

> RichA <rander3127(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>The 25mm f2.8, the 17mm f2.8, the 14-42 collapsing kit lens, now the
>>14-150mm zoom. They all suck.
>
> In rich's world everybody MUST pay $5000 for each lens in order to
> meet his standards for quality. Lenses must have the finest optics
> and not contain any plastic, even if it means that they weight five
> pounds and can only zoom by a factor of two.
>

No, duncecap, that's the rub. Olympus's DSLR kit lenses cost a pittance
and they worked very well. The 14-42 (DSLR lens), the older 14-45mm, the
two 40-150mm, they are/were all good. Unlike their current micro 4/3rds
glass.
 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2
Prev: Work as a photographer - question!
Next: It's official. Olympus no longer makes good lenses