Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Like 0

Which mirror less

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

mikehit
mikehit  56428 forum posts United Kingdom9 Constructive Critique Points
4 Nov 2013 - 2:21 PM


Quote: the Olympus 4/3 lenses seem to be afflicted by snail-like AF when used on M4/3, which makes them unusable IMO

The reviews I have read sound as if the 4/3 lenses (on the EM1) are fast but not as fast on native 4/3 camera - in which case calling them 'snail like' is like saying Yohan Blake is a slug because he is not as fast as Usain Bolt? Wink

Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links 
4 Nov 2013 - 2:21 PM

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

Paul Morgan
Paul Morgan e2 Member 1315324 forum postsPaul Morgan vcard England6 Constructive Critique Points
4 Nov 2013 - 6:12 PM


Quote: I've just bought a second hand Olympus 50-200 f2.8-3.5 [I don't have it yet, but looking forward to seeing how well it works]. Not a stellar lens, but not horrible and it gives me an equivalent reach of 400mm @f3.5. That's not at all bad and will cover all my needs until the dedicated 40-150 2.8 Pro for m4/3 comes along next year. Even then it may be well worth holding onto. I'd rarely need longer reach than that for my purposes

Which version, not that either is bad, I used the older 50-200 once with my E1, I found it very good but this is going back five or six years now.

Focusing was very good with my E3, certainly just as good as any other DSLR for single auto focus.

kodachrome
4 Nov 2013 - 8:11 PM

The Sony Alpha 7 might be worth a look, according to some review sites its spec even out shines the Olympus EM cameras.

ChrisV
ChrisV  7780 forum posts United Kingdom26 Constructive Critique Points
5 Nov 2013 - 8:06 AM


Quote: I've just bought a second hand Olympus 50-200 f2.8-3.5 [I don't have it yet, but looking forward to seeing how well it works]. Not a stellar lens, but not horrible and it gives me an equivalent reach of 400mm @f3.5.

Which version, not that either is bad, I used the older 50-200 once with my E1, I found it very good but this is going back five or six years now.

Focusing was very good with my E3, certainly just as good as any other DSLR for single auto focus.

It's the older one without the SWM afaik. A lot of people seem to think it's better as it takes longer along the zoom range to get to f3.5. Well built and weather-sealed apparently. Should be waiting for me when I get back from Belgium.

Steppenwolf
5 Nov 2013 - 8:09 AM


Quote: Ah, but that's now addressed with the EM1 which has PDAF for 4/3 lenses with an adaptor - and if tests are anything to go by although it isn't the lightning fast performance of the CDAF m4/3 lenses, it does seem to match what it was on the system they were designed for.


I was just relying on what DPR said, which is admittedly not always a good idea. It wasn't very encouraging - remarks like "They're not unusable, but ...".


Quote: You're right about lens size of course, but there's always the rider that the Olympus 300mm f2.8 will give a 600mm equivalent reach.


Of course, but you can crop the NEX frame to 4/3 AOV and perform the same trick. I still reckon that the 4/3 sensor size was a very good choice in view of the sensor technology advances, and I thought Sony were wrong to build their NEX CSCs around the APS-C sensor, but I'm beginning to change my mind on that. They have managed to make the cameras very small (too small, some would say) and the 16-50 is also minute. In the case of the telephoto lenses, the sensor pixel densities now being achieved mean that cropping is not really a problem any more.

Paul Morgan
Paul Morgan e2 Member 1315324 forum postsPaul Morgan vcard England6 Constructive Critique Points
5 Nov 2013 - 8:37 AM


Quote: I've just bought a second hand Olympus 50-200 f2.8-3.5 [I don't have it yet, but looking forward to seeing how well it works]. Not a stellar lens, but not horrible and it gives me an equivalent reach of 400mm @f3.5.

Which version, not that either is bad, I used the older 50-200 once with my E1, I found it very good but this is going back five or six years now.

Focusing was very good with my E3, certainly just as good as any other DSLR for single auto focus.

It's the older one without the SWM afaik. A lot of people seem to think it's better as it takes longer along the zoom range to get to f3.5. Well built and weather-sealed apparently. Should be waiting for me when I get back from Belgium.

Some of the older lenses could not take a firmware update to be compatible with adapters, I believe the 50-200 should be ok but it is best to check just to make sure, its also a big heavy lens and built like a tank, so just as well its a 2X crop Smile

Paul Morgan
Paul Morgan e2 Member 1315324 forum postsPaul Morgan vcard England6 Constructive Critique Points
5 Nov 2013 - 8:52 AM

Looks like you should be ok.

http://www.olympusamerica.com/files/oima_cckb/FT-MFT_Lens_Adapter_Compatibility_...

ChrisV
ChrisV  7780 forum posts United Kingdom26 Constructive Critique Points
5 Nov 2013 - 2:52 PM


Quote: Looks like you should be ok.

http://www.olympusamerica.com/files/oima_cckb/FT-MFT_Lens_Adapter_Compatibility_EN.pdf

Thanks, Paul - I found a thread suggesting the older lens was perhaps a little faster than the SWD version with the EM5. That of course only uses CDAF and works in S-AF mode only. I think it should work faster on the EM1 (I hope) and of course in C-AF. That and the 12-40 should cover 90% of my needs between them. I have a couple of decent primes and a manual fisheye (and lack of AF on a fisheye is no big deal). I also have the Panny 100-300. The only gap for my purposes is a rectilinear wide - options look pretty expensive...

ChrisV
ChrisV  7780 forum posts United Kingdom26 Constructive Critique Points
5 Nov 2013 - 2:53 PM

BTW - Belgium is really testing the weather sealing at the mo.Sad

Paul Morgan
Paul Morgan e2 Member 1315324 forum postsPaul Morgan vcard England6 Constructive Critique Points
5 Nov 2013 - 9:38 PM


Quote: Looks like you should be ok.

http://www.olympusamerica.com/files/oima_cckb/FT-MFT_Lens_Adapter_Compatibility_...

Thanks, Paul - I found a thread suggesting the older lens was perhaps a little faster than the SWD version with the EM5. That of course only uses CDAF and works in S-AF mode only. I think it should work faster on the EM1 (I hope) and of course in C-AF. That and the 12-40 should cover 90% of my needs between them. I have a couple of decent primes and a manual fisheye (and lack of AF on a fisheye is no big deal). I also have the Panny 100-300. The only gap for my purposes is a rectilinear wide - options look pretty expensive...

This new camera has taken a step beyond other M4/3 camera`s in that it is properly designed to fully take full advantage of the 4/3 lenses, I should imagine it will be fine.

I have never needed C-AF, so I have always got on well with 4/3 and now M4/3 Smile

There are only two more lenses that I really want for myself, the 17mm f1.8 and Sigma`s 60mm f2.8, although I would always welcome the new Olympus kit lens, it would look good on my EM5 Smile

ChrisV
ChrisV  7780 forum posts United Kingdom26 Constructive Critique Points
5 Nov 2013 - 9:57 PM

The new 12-40 is a fab lens. Not especially small or light, but really we'll built, cleverly designed (after being initially frightened by accidentally pulling it into MF) and as far as I can tell a good performer. I like the fact the manual has a limit at closest focus and infinity - it means if you want to refocus at either extreme (like for shooting fireworks, for example) you can do so without finding focus first. Talking of which, there's also a focus lock button on the lens too. The whole thing does inspire confidence - it's possibly more solidly built than my 5dII. I am still getting used to it a bit, but it seems to have all the manual controls I need.

One caveat is that auto ISO appears to top out at 1600 (if there's a way of specifying otherwise I haven't figured it out yet) - I would be grateful if anyone could give me a steer on that. It's also not very obvious which sensitivity level it's choosing at the time of shooting.

These things may just be my not being used to the camera - I've only had it a few days and it's my first high-end Olympus in the digital era.

Paul Morgan
Paul Morgan e2 Member 1315324 forum postsPaul Morgan vcard England6 Constructive Critique Points
5 Nov 2013 - 10:01 PM

Auto ISO, you can configure that, at least with the EM5, auto ISO in manual mode is disabled in the menu but its simple enough to set up, I`m guessing it will be very similar with the EM1.

ChrisV
ChrisV  7780 forum posts United Kingdom26 Constructive Critique Points
6 Nov 2013 - 9:34 AM

Yeah, I should look, shouldn't I? I've set the upper limit to 6400 now. I'd rather have it at that and get a steady hand held shot (although the IS seems quite effective at stupidly slow speeds it's not 'magic') than risk a clean image of camera wobble. I'm also getting more used to the auto indicator value.

I thought it was drastically over exposing last night (I was dialling in a not of negative exposure comp). But I'd knocked the exposure mode into spot highlight - that's a setting I don't think I've had before - another thing to get used to, although it is of course useful to have those additional options.

I'm not sure 'll use the art filters much, but the camera does genuinely feel packed with useful functions and settings. I bought it to be my most used camera in future and it looks like it will comfortably occupy that position.

Last Modified By ChrisV at 6 Nov 2013 - 9:40 AM
Paul Morgan
Paul Morgan e2 Member 1315324 forum postsPaul Morgan vcard England6 Constructive Critique Points
6 Nov 2013 - 8:19 PM

Can`t say I have ever used the art filters, not even for video.

The IS has the edge for video though, especially if your using a lens that has no IS built into it, as I have found comparing this against my G2 and GF2.

c40uk
c40uk e2 Member 182 forum postsc40uk vcard United Kingdom
6 Nov 2013 - 8:52 PM

well my reason for going m43 is cause there smaller ,lighter and for the pics i take the image quality is more than good enough for me .

Add a Comment

You must be a member to leave a comment

Username:
Password:
Remember me:
Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.