TAKO. INTERNET SEIT 1996.
Olympus-OM

Re: [OM] Hello from the past:), 9355 messages later and two lenses offer

Subject: Re: [OM] Hello from the past:), 9355 messages later and two lenses offered (24 shift and 21f2).
From: Ken Norton <ken@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2020 16:14:32 -0800
> I haven't encountered that. My fingers were poised to disagree. Then I 
> realized that my slow movement from Oly to Panny
> lenses means I seldom use the few Oly lenses I have left.

It steps into focus in a pretty choppy way. It appears to be a
situation where the lens focus mechanism's rate of change is unknown
to the Panasonic camera, so the camera advances the focus a small step
at a time to determine if it is getting better or not and then
advances another step to check again. As opposed to the old-school
method of just swinging the focus from one side to the other and
stopping when something gets sharp.

The native Panasonic lenses on the GX85 are VERY quick focusing. The
25/1.8 is a bit slow if I'm using single-point focusing, but otherwise
is also snappy enough to not be a problem. BTW, I think that 25/1.8 is
really a nice little gem of a lens. For being an almost freebee, (I
bought it on sale for about $100), it holds its own against really
expensive lenses.


> It all started with the Oly 14-150 lens I had when I got a GM5. I loved the 
> ergonomics and FL range, but no IS was a
> problem, so I switched to the Panny 14-140, with OIS. Then Ctein, after one 
> of his compulsive lens comparisons, declared
> the then new Panny 42.5/1.7 to be better away from center than the Oly 45/1.8 
> - AND - OIS.

My only complaint with the Panasonic lenses is the zoom ring rotates
in the wrong direction. But even the lowly 12-32 and 45-150 kit lenses
are really good.


> The "real" question may be why you are using this lens, or any Oly 4/3 lens, 
> on a Panny µ4/3 body. Those lenses are
> designed for PDAF focusing, which the Panny, and Olys other than the E-M1 
> series, don't have. Also, Panny's DfD AF won't
> work with them. So, you need a tripod to hold the camera so you won't get a 
> cramp hand holding it, waiting for focus. :-)

Because I can!  Well, it's more than just that, of course. It's
because these lenses are really really good and they actually have
focus rings I can turn. I will say that the 12-32 is a brilliant
little lens, but it lacks aperture, reach, and a focus ring.


> Like trying to use horse tack on a camel. ;-)

Yes, something like that. But if all you have is a camel and some
horse tack, you'd find a way to make it work.


> But wait! Those two bits of gear were actually designed to work together!

Yes, and they do extremely well too. As I now have multiple types of
lenses and multiple types of bodies in 4/3, I see where there was some
localized optimization. The 14-42 performs very well on the E-400, but
not so much on the other bodies. The 14-54 performs best on the E-1
and E-300, but hunts like an ADD/ADHD hound on the E-3. The SWD lenses
are awesome on the E-3, but act quite nervous on the other bodies.

Sadly, the m43 Panasonic lenses don't work on the E-3. ;)

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/

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>