Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] Olympus confirms a new 4/3 body

Subject: Re: [OM] Olympus confirms a new 4/3 body
From: Dawid Loubser <dawid@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2012 23:13:37 +0200
Just BTW, I realised that my reply below should have been directed at
Nathan, and not Micheal. Sorry for the mix-up :-)

I stand by my words though.
Dawid

On Sat, 2012-08-18 at 14:28 +0200, Dawid Loubser wrote:
> On Sat, 2012-08-18 at 15:16 +0800, Michael Wong wrote:
> > For the sensor size of 4/3, M4/3, I would accept the cameras & lenses size
> > as M4/3 system. For 4/3 system, I complained that cameras & lenses size &
> > weight as APS-C or FF system but with a small sensor.
> 
> You know, I always thought like you did, until I saw for myself how
> superior (in terms of detail) the output of an E-5 + SHG lenses are
> compard to a Nikon D3 or D700 (comparable 12MP FF bodies). Not to
> mention how far superior it is to the Micro Four Thirds lenses as well.
> And I will go so far as to say the wide-angle resolution at larger
> apertures - mostly in the corners - is also far superior to a Leica M9
> and an Elmarit ASPH 28/2.8 (go look at the samples yourself, Ken
> Rockwell's is a good start for a collection of full-size M9 files).
> 
> For example, the M.Zuiko Digital 45/1.8 output looks like an 15-55 kit
> lens compared to the ZD 50 Macro or 35-100 Zoom. The high-end four
> thirds equipment are not - and never were meant to be - compact everyday
> cameras. The output is so good precisely because the lenses are so
> massive compared to the sensor.
> 
> They represent amongst the best of what is physically possible with a
> 35mm-sized camera system, and should be used *deliberately*. It's
> specialised equipment for a specialised task (ultimate detail capture).
> 
> Olympus must realise that there are people treating the SHG lenses as
> specialised capture devices, and I think it's wonderful that they will
> continue to support them. From an engineering standpoint, they truly
> knew what they were doing with this system, which I have never seen as
> trying to compete with FF 35mm digital. Compare it to fast cars: Ferrari
> and Porsche (Nikon and Canon) compete head-to-head, but other niche car
> makers (TVR, Lotus, etc) produce fast cars that, due to some
> compromises, are radically better in some aspects, but worse in others.
> There is no direct competition - a Porsche man will never buy a TVR, and
> vice versa. Still, the niche makers retain a pure vision, and continue
> with their different engineering approach. In the end - there is more
> choice, and everybody is happy.
> 
> 
> Note: I *hate* how bulky and blobby the E-5 and the SHG lenses are.
> Really. I almost never walk around with them. I use the system like I do
> my medium-format cameras, and for that use-case (which usually involves
> good light, and often a tripod) I am overjoyed at the output, which is
> among the best of the best, period.
> 
> Michael, your needs are different, and for you, 4/3 is not right. My
> "compact/quick" need is still satisfied by one or two small 35mm film
> cameras (Leica M3, plain-prism Nikon F). Spontaneous imagery works
> better in B&W film in anyway :-)
> 
> have fun,
> Dawid
> 

-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz