HA0T0

Hi! I asked a question about why you may be choosing to stay with m43 instead of going Sony FE. Link here: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/57521153 It's reached the 150-post limit per thread ...

Sony has just announced their cheap FE 50/1.8 (25/0.9 equivalent!) lens. With GX8 being heavier than the A7/A7R and the PaniLeica 25/1.4 heavier and more expensive than the FE 50/1.8, what's ...

More zoom range, and just slightly slower on the long end. Should be around $1200 combined. It might even be lighter than whatever Oly can come up with!

Here's your two comparative lenses: Canon EF 24mm f/2.8 IS USM $599 Sony E 16mm f/2.8: $248 (one stop slower, same as the Olympus) $799 can buy you this: Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24mm F1.8G ED

People don't. :-P But yes, so much this. Crop sensors definitely have the advantage in the long term. It already has on the long end because existing lens designs can be recycled. On the wide end ...

Is it because equivalence is hard to understand or something? :-) It may surprise you that FF sensors actually have worse high ISO performance than smaller sensors. Think about it. They have higher ...

Heh, I was only half serious and am sure Wally wasn't at all. But yes, 12-100/2.8 would be trivial, if you accept the compromise. It's only difficult due to the questionable quest for edge ...

It's not like you're talking about 12-100/1.4. That would be interesting. 12-100/2.8 would be pretty trivial. m43 users are funny.

I doubt people care about optical quality that much as long as it's acceptable. It's just that a 35/3.5 equivalent, non-macro prime is a pretty pointless lens.

Funny that I've never owned any Olympus gear. I simply think Panasonic should have done much better, because they could have. And again, 25mm is basically 24mm. 24/1.4 lenses have been in ...

Olympus made a pair of f/2 zooms for 4/3. Granted they were double the weight of their FF equivalents, but at least they tried. They stopped trying in m43 days too, but with their financial ...

And it's a tiny company compared to Panasonic. Which only makes the lack of investment into high-end lenses from the latter even more inexcusable, don't you think? Olympus at least tried their hand ...

I use a GM1 and have zero interest in any of the lenses listed either. :-P I think they were quite right in scrapping those ridiculously slow primes. Non of those were macro lenses I assume? We'll ...

You started it by saying 24-200/2.8. Which is simply wrong. For light gathering, you are still wrong. It's equivalent to 24-200/5.6 over the whole frame, which is the only thing that matters. But ...

Come on, if Cosina can make a 17.5/0.95, Panasonic certainly can! I'm not sure there's a reason a 17/0.7 on m43 cannot be as good as a 35/1.4 on 35mm. The current generation of 35/1.4 have decades ...

I would pay good money for a 17mm f/0.7. Such a normal wide with real DoF control would end my format envy once and for all. Not gonna happen though. :-) But my guess is yet another 25/1.4.