On 6 Jan 2010, at 14:18, Dawid Loubser wrote:
> On 06 Jan 2010, at 11:09 AM, Chris Barker wrote:
>> 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.
>
> No, I meant for them to develop a new line of lenses for m4/3, with
> automatic diaphragms etc.
> Purpose-designed for the mount, with electronics etc. They have the
> mechanical, optical and electronic
> skills for this already, and I see m4/3 as a potential goldmine of a
> market. I did not refer to the
> (current practice) of adapting manual M-mount lenses to m4/3.
I didn't realise that they did the electronic connections already.
>
>>
>> And ...
>>
>> Where have you found that the 20/1.7 needs a load of correction in
>> software?
>
> Most m4/3 lenses have high resolution, but are complete dogs when it
> comes to distortion and chromatic
snip
>> And your point about the M-Zuiko 17/2.8: what do you mean by
>> "compromised retrofocus design"?
>
> A retrofocus wide angle will never be as good as a non-retrofocus
> design. They have to bend the light
> a lot more, and are inevitable never as good, or HUGE (i.e. Nikkor
> 14-24). m4/3 alows ample space
snip
Thanks for those bits of information, Dawid.
Chris
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|