On 1/5/2017 4:57 PM, Mike Gordon via olympus wrote:
Melange Moose writes:
<<Well, I have yet to haul it around for hours on the trail. There is another player
about to be officially announced, a PLeica 12-60/2.8-4. The current, relatively recent,
Panny 12-60 is a decent, but uninspiring lens, far inferior IQ to the 12-100. The new
PLeica will be about 60% <<the weight of the 12-100 about the same size and a little
lighter than the Oly 12-40/2.8.
Here it is for pre-order:
https://www.adorama.com/ipc1260l.html?EmailPrice=T
Already done at B&H. It isn't due for at least three months, and I can cancel
any time I want, so it's a no risk deal.
Not much leaked that I saw. Yet another slowish nl range zoom--has to hit it
out of the park to make it interesting.
Not necessarily, for me. I used the 12-50 for years, and got a lot of great shots with it, but its age really shows
against newer lenses. The pedestrian Lumix 12-60 is a bit better already; even the 14-140 at a couple of FLs.
If the PLeica 12-60 is a first rate performer
It does go to 0.6X (FF)--prolly at long end which is more than the Oly 12-100.
Perhaps so "Shortest shooting distance: 20 cm (wide angle), 24 cm (telephoto)",
which suggests max. mag. is at long end.
I have not seen many sample images. Thoughts on this beast for 1K?
Do you think production examples even exist yet?
Another thing bothered me on the purple halos with the new Panny 42.5/1.7
---one example here : scroll down.
http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Panasonic_Lumix_G_42-5mm_f1-7_H_HS043E/
I wonder if he used an Oly body for the shot?--can't tell from work and not
sure if have exif.
"Note the purple fringing you can see on the Lumix sample disappears from f2.8 onwards, and I should also mention the
samples above were taken with an Olympus body. I've also experienced blue / purple flare when using the Lumix 7-14mm on
Olympus bodies, so this could be a similar issue. I'll retest the lens on a Lumix body to see if the issue repeats to
the same extent."
I don't see where he did so. Not sure what suitable subject I might have, but
I'll try to test the lens on both brands.
It strongly reminds me of the UV issue using Panny lenses on Oly--not sure
I've seen that mentioned on list. Perhaps that is the whole issue. Also
since em-1 I think Oly does read CA metadata on Oly lenses and have read with
Panny lenses too---not sure about the latter. Anyone know for sure?
UV filters in Oly bodies cut off at 390 and Panny at 430 with lens designs
taking that into account. I have read that Oly lenses have some secret sauce
UV filtering as well, but that is hearsay. So Panny lenses on Oly bodies can
get purple fringing especially in OOF specular highlights related to this. I
did find one link though it is not where I first saw this.
http://alanwatsonforster.org/writing/mft-purple.html
Interesting? (A bit unsettling too)
OTOH, how much trouble have people run into in practical use?
Perhaps DXO ameliorates this effect in software as they do their own CA
analysis. Oly and Panny need(ed) to cooperate a tad more.
I get a little frustrated on occasion. I would like my PLeica 100-400 to sync with the E-M5 II IBIS. And yet, I've used
mix and match bodies and lenses a great deal, with never a problem like these.
In many ways, the compatibility is greater than it might have been. I do think that having more than one maker has
contributed to the success of µ4/3. There's certainly an amazing variety of bodies and lenses to choose from. I love that.
Micro 1 1/3 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/
|