On 12/30/2012 12:27 PM, Paul Braun wrote:
> On 12/30/12 06:11 : , piers@xxxxxxxx wrote:
>> If you want the ability to use on both systems, Paul, you will
>> be@making sacrifices - less choice of lenses, even fewer which will do
>> fast ('imager') AF on MFT.
>>
>> Go native. I think several here@will extol the Panasonic 20/1.7
>>
>>
> And it's in my price range. DPReview liked it as well...
Or, if you really prefer the 35mm angle of view, wait for the Oly 17/1.8.
Available for pre-order at $499, so should
appear soon. $150 more than the Panny, and a little lighter (no in-lens IS).
The optical design looks much more
sophisticated than the 17/2.8.
Given what the reviewers and market have told Oly about their 17/2.8 and the
Panny 20mm, and their history with premium
MZ lenses, it will probably be excellent. Won't know for sure until
reports/reviews show up, though.
Did you buy the body with 12-50? You might want to compare samples and reviews
of it to the 20/1.7. The old assumption
that zooms are inferior to primes is often wrong these days. You may gain only
speed, which may or may not be that many
$ important to you.
> ... I am correct in my assumption that stacking the OM-4/3 adapter on top of
> the 4/3-MFT adapter is not a good thing?
No, you are not correct. It should work fine, unless the OM-4/3 touches the
contacts in the
4/3-MFT. I had that problem with an LTM-EF adapter on the Canons. A piece of
tape on the back resolved it.
Adaptable Moose
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|