Dawid
I agree that it would be exciting to have CV do stuff for the m4/3 range, but
there would be 2 obstacles:
1. Crop factor would cause extra obstacles.
2. You would have to be a keen photog to want to use stop-down metering
all the time.
And ...
Where have you found that the 20/1.7 needs a load of correction in software?
And your point about the M-Zuiko 17/2.8: what do you mean by "compromised
retrofocus design"?
[I have the Panasonic LX3 which needs quite a bit of correction, particularly
at the wide end (24mm equivalent), so it would come as no surprise that the
20mm was similarly designed. And I have read your previous posts about the
fringing produced by the 17mm.]
Chris
On 6 Jan 2010, at 08:27, Dawid Loubser wrote:
> The only thing seriously preventing me from adopting something like
> Micro Four Thirds
> are the pathetic lens ranges - boring slow zoom after zoom, and there
> is really only one
> good (if one can call a lens that needs serious software correction
> "good", but that's another debate)
> fast prime available, the Panasonic 20/1.7.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|