On 2/3/2022 3:36 PM, Mike Gordon via olympus wrote:
Great analysis, Moose. Thanks for that. I am betting the resolution will be
substantially better. Given the weight advantage it could have use on some
long hiking trips, if they are again
safe and possible anytime soon.
This raises a couple of questions for me.
1. What will the resolution on a 4/3 sensor be, relative to lenses designed for
the smaller format?
2. In the field, on a hike, would I rather have a fixed long view, or a wide
range of FLs that don't end up as long?
500 mm on a FF body vs. 200-600 mm eq. on µ4/3?
If size/weight is a big issue, a Panny ZS200 is very slightly smaller in volume and v. slightly heavier that the mirror
lens alone. 24-360 mm eq.
This isn't good enough? <https://photos.app.goo.gl/73ub1TuTBfcCFhyq5>
On our 2018 day in Dublin, I took the full kit. Dublin 2019, I took the ZS200 and a GX9 for super wide. I didn't feel I
lost anything. I used the ZS on a couple of other days, too. LensMate filter adapter for a C-U lens was all it needed,
for close focus at longer FLs.
You are correct about the T mount--the pdf for the mount adapters was not there
before but it clearly has the thread pitch and screw diameter of T mount but it
rotates like a T2 mount so they really should have called it that. There, I
get to nitpick about something.
You and I are among the 2.7% of photographers who know the difference between T and T2 mounts. Everything but very old
is T2, and makers don't want to confuse potential buyers with something irrelevant.
From mflenses forum, "T and T2 = same thing, don't worry, be happy." "Manufacturers caused confusion, by incorrectly
naming some T2 mount threaded lenses "T-mount".
Un Convinced 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/
|