On 7/15/2020 10:48 AM, Ken Norton wrote:
"First, I would like to stress that the sale of the Imaging Division does not mean
that we will withdraw from the imaging business. We will continue to offer unique and
exciting products...."
I fail to follow the logic...
Now that Canon has IBIS in their FUL-FRAME MIRRORLESS cameras, there
literally is no USP (Unique Selling Point/Proposition) to Olympus m43
cameras.
It's the lenses, silly! :-)
Herewith a pair of quite comparable kits. I've used Sony 'cause that's what you and I have and I don't know what native
lenses there are for the Canon Rs:
Visual size: <https://j.mp/39327Mt>
Weight:
µ4/3 Lens g Sony Lens g
--------------------------------------------------
7-14/4 300 16-35/4 518
14-140/f4-5.8 460 24-240/3.5-6.3 780
Sub-T 760 1,298
100-300/4-5.6 450 200-600/5.6-6.3 2,115
Total 1,210 3,413
I have the three Panny lenses and the first two Sonys. I attest that the Sonys on an A7 II feel bigger and heavier than
the numbers suggest.
In the visual size comparison, I've included the PLeica 100-400, which is a
dwarf compared to the shorter FL Sony.
The Sony is a nice camera, and the lenses seem fine, but it's never going to replace the µ4/3 gear in the field. (Nor am
I going to buy and carry that Sony 200-600!)
Data Points 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/
|