Olympus dalliance with DSLRs over?
in [Digital Cameras]
|
From: nospam on 24 May 2010 15:38 In article <r0llv5djedg6tttjjll5ua9n6935k80cjk(a)4ax.com>, John Navas <jnspam1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > >As to better, in lens optical (VR / IS) is superior to in body sensor > >moving in all cases - except those lenses that don't have it... > > Not necessarily. Both approaches have pros and cons, and can be made to > work quite well in practice. There is no one best system. in-lens works better at longer focal lengths where stabilization matters. it can also be precisely tuned to the specifics of a lens versus needing to work over a wide range of focal lengths. in-camera works with all lenses, which is nice if you have older lenses, but a new camera system with new lenses does not have that issue. the choice of in-lens stabilization is a very good one.
From: John Navas on 24 May 2010 15:41 On Mon, 24 May 2010 12:38:10 -0700, nospam <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote in <240520101238101031%nospam(a)nospam.invalid>: >In article <r0llv5djedg6tttjjll5ua9n6935k80cjk(a)4ax.com>, John Navas ><jnspam1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > >> >As to better, in lens optical (VR / IS) is superior to in body sensor >> >moving in all cases - except those lenses that don't have it... >> >> Not necessarily. Both approaches have pros and cons, and can be made to >> work quite well in practice. There is no one best system. > >in-lens works better at longer focal lengths where stabilization >matters. it can also be precisely tuned to the specifics of a lens >versus needing to work over a wide range of focal lengths. > >in-camera works with all lenses, which is nice if you have older >lenses, but a new camera system with new lenses does not have that >issue. > >the choice of in-lens stabilization is a very good one. One of the drawbacks of in-lens you conveniently ignore is cost. As I wrote, there is no one best system. -- Best regards, John Buying a dSLR doesn't make you a photographer, it makes you a dSLR owner. "The single most important component of a camera is the twelve inches behind it." -Ansel Adams
From: nospam on 24 May 2010 15:44 In article <5fllv51p9k0reaeutuk5rl7j6mpj8am1lc(a)4ax.com>, John Navas <jnspam1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > One of the drawbacks of in-lens you conveniently ignore is cost. i didn't ignore it. in-camera is not free either. everything has a cost. > As I wrote, there is no one best system. true, but in this case, in-lens is clearly the right choice.
From: John Navas on 24 May 2010 16:06 On Mon, 24 May 2010 12:44:31 -0700, nospam <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote in <240520101244313882%nospam(a)nospam.invalid>: >In article <5fllv51p9k0reaeutuk5rl7j6mpj8am1lc(a)4ax.com>, John Navas ><jnspam1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > >> One of the drawbacks of in-lens you conveniently ignore is cost. > >i didn't ignore it. in-camera is not free either. everything has a cost. > >> As I wrote, there is no one best system. > >true, but in this case, in-lens is clearly the right choice. In your opinion. My opinion differs. -- Best regards, John Buying a dSLR doesn't make you a photographer, it makes you a dSLR owner. "The single most important component of a camera is the twelve inches behind it." -Ansel Adams
From: SMS on 24 May 2010 16:24
On 24/05/10 10:18 AM, Bruce wrote: <snip> > Meanwhile, Micro Four Thirds is a spectacular success. It makes sense > for Olympus to concentrate on Micro Four Thirds. Huh? Why don't you ever see anyone with a micro 4:3 camera. Go to a popular vista point in a place like Yosemite where it looks like a D-SLR convention is being held and look for a micro 4:3 camera. I've never seen one, at least not in March 2010. Meanwhile you see loads of the latest Canon and Nikon models. I've also never seen one for sale in a store that sells interchangeable lens cameras. |