On 2/4/2013 2:48 PM, Ken Norton wrote:
>> I believe the issue is the way the lens focuses, designed for PDAF....
>> ...ALL 4/3 lenses will be slow to focus on at least Oly µ4/3 bodies, some
>> slower than others.
> Yes, that is what I'm referring to in public.
>
> A philosophical question for you: If the evidence shows that there is
> a dramatic product improvement coming that effectively obsoletes the
> current product with an improved focusing technology that will make
> the current product appear to be a total dog, is that product
> currently a total dog?
I answered a later post about this 'dog' terminology and usage first
intentionally, to address this point.
No, it is not, if it meets the needs of the moment.
Nor does it become a dog in the future, if the improvements don't impact the
needs of a particular user. AF speed, frame
rate and several other things important to may users of high performance DSLRs
mean nothing to the LF photographer. The
first DLSR and the late ones are all the same, from that perspective, a pack of
dogs.
> An argument could be made that since something is "the best available
> right now" doesn't necessarily make it good. Take the subject of
> "Tracking AF". It's pretty much a given that it's nearly unusable in
> the E-M5. As there isn't anything better in m43 mount, does that make
> it good? No. If it stinks, it stinks. Olympus KNOWS that it stinks,
> too.
And that is meaningless to some users, including me. As is frame rate. That's
always one of the featured stats in
reports of new cameras. And I just don't bloody well care; they all can shoot
as fast or faster than I need. I want to
know what the pixel level detail looks like at various ISOs. Are there little
artifact 'worms', hidden in the noise,
that come out to spoil the image when noise is reduced? And so on.
So, if, as you imply, the OM-D, E-Mx will have some sort of new/composite focus
tech that will track objects flying by
at 200 mph, all I'll want to know is whether any compromises to IQ from the M5
have occurred to do that. If still shots
of static or relatively slow moving subjects (remember the pelicans!) have
better IQ, I'm interested, if not, no.
> Shall we discuss battery life? No, let's not.
I already have, and, like everybody here but Chuck, whose jury is still out, so
far I'm happy with it. Have you spent a
day in the field with one? How was your battery life? Are you listening to the
'fan boys", AKA vocal critics who need
things to rant about?
> The point I was making is that if you want a certain level of reliable
> performance, there is still no substitute for running the native
> lenses on the native matched technology.
Absolutely! So when are you going to stop using OM lenses on digicams, and
exhort other people to stop?
In case you feel that is unfair, all I'm saying is that it depends on the user,
AND on the use. I found MF lenses on my
generally Canons unrewarding. I don't tell others they are wrong for finding it
wonderful.
More directly to this specific point, as you meant it. I quite agree.
I can't see adapted lenses as particularly useful except for very limited,
special purposes. 1:1 macro lens on a
bellows? MF Zuiko 80/4 Auto, hands down. General purpose zoom? M.Zuiko 14-150.
I also used a Sigma 600/8 mirror lens on my Canon DSLRs. Not very useful until
the 60D. With live view and 1.6x factor,
I got some great images I would not otherwise have made. OTOH, with 600 mm eq.
at f6.7, and no donut bokeh, let alone
the size, weight and convenience factors, from the 75-300, I may never use it
on the M5.
Just as I used MF lenses on my 300D as a test and stopgap until I determined
that I liked digital, but didn't like the
compromises, and bought suitable, native, EF lenses, I couldn't see using a
14-54, 4/3 lens with adapter on µ4/3, a big,
heavy, slow focusing kludge, as anything but a stopgap. But others' mileages
may vary, probably do.
> I know that, Olympus definitely knows that, next products will help that.
And I wish them very well with that. It's pleasing to me to be using almost all
Oly equipment again, after a lot of
years away. But the competition are not fools, so I hope Oly can build both
quickly and well on their recent success.
And make no mistake, the E-M5 is a big success.
Fan Boy? Moose
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|