With the four thirds sensor being half the size of the full frame 5D,
to get the same shallow DOF the lens has to be opened up a full stop
more than the equivalent field of view lens on the 5D. So a 24-105 f4
would pretty much accomplish the same thing as a 14-54 f2.8 (other
than ease of manual focus). The weight of the big C*non lenses is
something I've been reluctant to test out first hand. Depending upon
what shows up at PMA, that may change.
-jeff
On 10/12/06, Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> You neglected to note John's comment on lens speed. The Canons at f/4
> and f/4.5-5.6 don't compare very favorably to both Zuiko's f/2.8-3.5.
> That's why in my response I tried to find lenses that could cover the
> full range at a constant f/2.8. You can do it but it takes three lenses
> instead of two and a pack burro to carry it all around.
>
> Of course, the 5D can handle a couple more notches on the ISO dial so a
> stop or two slower on the aperture is more readily handled.
>
> Chuck Norcutt
>
>
> Jeff Keller wrote:
> > C*non 24-105/4 + 100-400/4.5-5.6 ?
> >
> > Probably DOF options would be as good with the FF C*non as the Zuiko
> > due to the format size. C*non has the ISO advantage, so exposure
> > shouldn't be an issue.
> >
> > Oh ... there was a mention of actually being able to carry the lenses.
> > OK advantage to the Zuikos. Actually the 24-105 doesn't look too bad
> > for weight.
> >
> > -jeff
> >
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|