Jan wrote:
> I think you’ll find that your silver-nosed friends (if you still have any)
> will be happier with the m43.
Well, yes, actually! There are a few silvernosed lenses that see very
active duty: 35/2, 100/2.8 and 300/4.5. The 200/4 sees some action.
But the 35/2.8 and 50mm silvernosed lenses are running body-cap duty.
I've been using nearly everything on the Canon 6D with mostly superb
results. All lenses faster than F2.8 tend to have vignetting issues
and color shift issues wide open. This has been an ongoing issue with
nearly all Canon FF digital cameras since the beginning of time. Has
something to do with max effective aperture of the microlenses and
sensel depth of the sensor. Once you stop it down, the problem
typically goes away. Some lenses cause major hot-spot issues on the
DMC-L1 (probably same issue), while a non-issue on other bodies.
> I spent some time with a Sony FF friend, and he had a devil of a time trying
> to use my OM lenses that I loaned him. His IBIS sucked, and the camera made
> him go through multiple menu picks to change lenses, whereas my E-M1.2 only
> required one.
UI design is problematic with both the SONY and Canon. People grouse
about Olympus' complex menus, but in reality, the richness of features
is much easier to tame.
> Plus, going FF means you can’t use focal reducers, which can be just
> fantastic.
The choice is a more expensive FF with less expensive adapter, or a
less expensive m43 with more expensive Metabones adapter.
Unfortunately, the 0.7x still makes the lenses effectively longer than
the FF equivalent. The cost delta between the two choices is not great
enough to be a concern one way or the other. However, there are some
used m43 bodies that could swing the equation.
AG Schnozz
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|