Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] 12-40 F2.8 Oly zoom for the EM-1

Subject: Re: [OM] 12-40 F2.8 Oly zoom for the EM-1
From: Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2013 10:16:17 -0400
How about f/4 at 3200 or even f/5.6 at 6400?  I suspect the E-M5 may 
perform as well at 6400 as the E-5 does at 1600.  Times change.

Chuck Norcutt


On 8/29/2013 4:36 PM, Daniel Sepke wrote:
> In my last job I used my e-5 with the 12-60, 14-35 and the 35-100 in a 
> regular shooting role as at a private school. I routinely needed to work in 
> the theatre and a chapel. The latter involved needing to shoot at f2.8 1/60th 
> and 1600 ISO. So fast lenses were my only option to get anything even vaguely 
> usable.
>
> Now granted that was professional usage but I wouldn't want to use an extreme 
> variable aperture zoom in my personal work if I have the choice. Now that I'm 
> no longer working for the school I have sold most of my Oly kit and just kept 
> the 14-54/50-200 combo with an e-620. I really miss the 35-100 though, 
> awesome lens that one.
>
> I don't disagree on a lot of your points though. For casual users its not as 
> big an issue. But for learning the craft it helps to have as little area for 
> confusion.
>
> Dan S
>
> On Aug 28, 2013, at 4:03 PM, "Moose" <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> On 8/26/2013 3:52 PM, usher99@xxxxxxx wrote:
>>> More data leaked.
>>>
>>> http://www.dailycameranews.com/2013/08/olympus-om-d-e-m1-camera-12-40mm-f2-8-pro-lens-price/
>>>
>>> Pricey combo. Will see how it performs relative to the similar Panny
>>> zoom.  Looks  like very serious gear.
>>
>> It may seem a silly question, but, serious for what, and whom?
>>
>> Fast zooms were a big deal in film and early digital days. We associate them 
>> with serious/pro photographers because they
>> are big, heavy and pricey and because they were bread and butter lenses for 
>> many actual pros.
>>
>> And yes, I still have my  80-200/2.8s. They were important lenses with film. 
>> Needing 1/200 minimum shutter speed, and
>> more, if to be enlarged or cropped much, with film that started to go 
>> downhill noticeably at ASA 200, later 400, lens
>> speed becomes really important for any but really good light. And I have the 
>> 24-40/2.8 and 60-120/2.8, but seldom found
>> them really more useful than the typical f3.5-4.5 zooms.
>>
>> With IS and amazing IQ at higher ISOs, one doesn't need a wide aperture to 
>> get the shot for many uses. So the advantages
>> of fast lenses start to come down to higher shutter speeds to stop subject 
>> motion, focusing and intentional shallow DOF,
>> for subject/background separation and artistic effects.
>>
>> Contemporary AF systems work well with slower lenses and rear screens and 
>> EVFs don't need great lens speed to be
>> effective. I am far, far more often looking for more than less DOF. Would I 
>> like to be able to catch more birds in
>> flight? Sure! Do I think a bigger, faster lens would hep my reflexes to find 
>> and keep the subjects in the frame? Not
>> really. ;-)
>>
>> It was also true that essentially all lenses needed to be stopped down at 
>> least a couple of stops for best performance.
>> This is far less true with contemporary lens designs, so good IQ at any 
>> given stop requires less maximum aperture.
>>
>> So what would a 24-80 eq. f2.8 zoom bring to me that my 24-100 eq. f3.5-6.3 
>> doesn't? Would it look cool, more
>> impressive? I suspect it will just look large on µ4/3 bodies. It would mean 
>> lower ISOs at the long end, which ain't bad.
>> It would mean carrying around a larger, heavier lens, perhaps offset by a 
>> lighter wallet? :-)
>>
>> Like virtually all fast lenses, especially zooms, I'll bet it won't focus 
>> very close. The 12-50, OTOH, has an excellent
>> Macro mode. Close focus is really important to me.
>>
>> So, are we to be impressed, and interested, because such a lens was a big 
>> deal long ago? Or might we match up the
>> characteristics of a new tool against our practical photographic needs 
>> before thinking about shelling out the dough? And
>> toting the load. ;-)
>>
>> My 12-50 is almost certainly a better match for me. Darn fine lens, in fact. 
>> :-)
>>
>> Pragmatic Toter 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/
>>
-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz