Seems unlikely that a Sony would carry over much DNA from the A1, but
what do I know about it? There's always that elusive "psychological
DNA" that led some of us mysteriously from OM into the E system. My
Lummox FZ20 makes me slightly more interested in the m4/3 Lummoxen.
Have to start from somewhere.
I like the looks on paper of the NEX. Seems like lens selection would
be the key consideration. Lots more to choose from with m4/3, but
that's a moving target.
I guess as one starts over, an EVIL with bigger sensor is better, all
other things being equal, and it seems like camera body size is an
"equal." But are the NEX lenses so honking big as compared to the body
in order to cover the sensor, or is that just a style thing? I don't
mind it, but if the cameras themselves are about the same size, perhaps
m4/3 still holds a potential advantage in having smaller lenses?
Joel W.
On Sat, Dec 17, 2011, at 10:40 PM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
> I think Ken and I would both like a resurrected Minolta A1. It would
> have 12+MP on its 2/3 sensor and a high res viewfinder. DPReview said
> the original lens wasn't quite good enough to resolve the 8MP of the A2
> so that would likely need some attention. I still love the ergonomics
> of the camera but the 320x240 EVF is just too primitive for other than
> casual use.
>
> Chuck Norcutt
--
http://www.fastmail.fm - Send your email first class
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|