Olympus OM Micro Four Thirds camera!

Luckypenguin wrote in post #14385811
This is very common comparison between these two lenses. I see the 20mm as being virtually a wide-angle lens, whereas the PL 25mm is very much a standard focal length lens and will allow you to start playing with a shallower depth-of-field. The PL25 is also more useful for portraits whereas the 20mm is just a bit too wide.

PL 25mm f1.4

Both are very sharp, although the PL25 is sharper across the full frame because it doesn't rely on software correction to correct barrel distortion.

Yeah, it's a tough choice for sure (great shot BTW). My issue is the 25mm is just too damn big. The 20 has the slow AF motor though, so it's not easy. Plus, the 25mm being slightly longer FL AND being 1.4 -vs- 1.7 gives you a bit less DOF when you want it. But in the end for me the 20 wins on size alone. Plus, it's basically a mix between a 35 and 50, so for some people (who prefer 35) it's a "better" FL. I also really like it for when I'm only taking ONE lens and 50 might be too long? But yeah, I wish it was 1.4 and I wish it's motor was faster...

Great analysis. It shows how spoiled we are when we refer to the 25mm as being too big, bu I know what you mean. With the 20mm mounted you can stow a camera much more easily. I tend to agree that as a "one lens" solution the 20mm would probably be the winner due to the size and focal length. It's just a shame that the focus mechanism is so old tech (unit focusing rather than internal focusing).

efoo wrote in post #14383387
But will they have the nifty features of Olympus 12-50mm zoom lens?
- weather-proof.
- selectable manual zoom / electronic zoom / macro mode.

Other than the new 12-50, how many other Olympus lenses can claim the same?

If a 35-100/2.8 with the features you specified would cost the same as the Canon 70-200/2.8L IS II, how many people will still buy one?

Coming from the DSLR world, I'm not new to paying >$1000 for a premium lens, but looking over the m4/3 lens landscape, it looks like most m4/3 users are not ready for such "extravagance" yet (or at least, the manufacturers don't think people are ready yet).....

(The Voiglander and Panasonic 7-14 are the few examples I see.)

Luckypenguin wrote in post #14385811
One thing that I have found with the m4/3 primes like the 20/1.7, 25/1.4, and 45/1.8 is that they are still very sharp when shot wide-open. In comparison, I find equivalent lenses like the Sigma 30/1.4 and the Canon 50/1.4 to be too soft unless stopped down, and both can suffer from front or back focus which is more noticeable with a shallow DOF. For me those points actually nullify any theoretical advantage a larger APS-C sensor might offer in obtaining a shallow DOF.

I don't have first-hand experience with any of the lenses mentioned, but according to Photozone, the Canon 50/1.4 offers fairly decent border sharpness at F2.0, comparable to what the Panasonic 20/1.7 at both F1.7 and F2.0:

http://www.photozone.d​e …65-canon50f14apsc?start=1
http://www.photozone.d​e …ts/464-pana_20_17?start=1

and of course, the Canon 50/1.4 at F2.0 would still have less DOF than the Panasonic 20/1.7 wide-open.

The front- and back-focus problems are much less of an issue on bodies offering micro-adjustment. Not to mention, for still-life one always has the option of doing contrast-detection (or 10x-magnified manual focus) via LiveView that focus accuracy is not automatically worse with a DSLR.

Luckypenguin wrote in post #14387421
Great analysis. It shows how spoiled we are when we refer to the 25mm as being too big, bu I know what you mean. With the 20mm mounted you can stow a camera much more easily. I tend to agree that as a "one lens" solution the 20mm would probably be the winner due to the size and focal length. It's just a shame that the focus mechanism is so old tech (unit focusing rather than internal focusing).

part of that too, is I had the 20 on a GF1 for a year back when the options were far fewer. Because it was THE option then, it's hard to pass it up now. On my DSLR I have 24, 50 and 85. On my MFT I have 28, 40, 90. I have the MFT mostly picked on size -vs- specs because I'd prefer the 12mm f/2 and 25 1.4 if they were the same sizes as the 14 and 20 options but they're not. This camera is for when the DSLR is too big though, so I don't want to shift back into bigger lenses here... It's tough though because you have to choose which specs are more important to you personally, or shell out for the whole collection!

the 14mm is comically small though. I never owned one before, it's much shorter -vs- the 20, but it's diameter is also much less. Hell, they even make a special thinner lenscap for it! I want to find a spare for the 20 honestly.

efoo wrote in post #14383228
Wow Nic, your points there may even convince me to give EM-5 (or OM-D) a try.

I actually handled one at a local Digital Camera Warehouse shop earlier this afternoon. It is a very well made camera, very compact (which has its disadvantage in that there is no space for my little pinky finger to hold onto). The lack of fast zoom is a problem too, maybe Olympus will produce one in the future. In the mean time the kit 12-50mm lens + a 45mm f/1.8 lens combo look tempting.

Yes it is a great combo, the 12-50mm kits lens is not half bad! even in macro mode and the 45mm f1.8 well!! it's a must have if you shoot with a MFT. Here's a couple a pics from this combo.

EM-5 12-50MM Kit Lens, ISO 200, f11, 8 second Exposure.

RetroBlader wrote in post #14388416
I don't have first-hand experience with any of the lenses mentioned, but according to Photozone, the Canon 50/1.4 offers fairly decent border sharpness at F2.0, comparable to what the Panasonic 20/1.7 at both F1.7 and F2.0:

http://www.photozone.d​e …65-canon50f14apsc?start=1
http://www.photozone.d​e …ts/464-pana_20_17?start=1

and of course, the Canon 50/1.4 at F2.0 would still have less DOF than the Panasonic 20/1.7 wide-open.

The front- and back-focus problems are much less of an issue on bodies offering micro-adjustment. Not to mention, for still-life one always has the option of doing contrast-detection (or 10x-magnified manual focus) via LiveView that focus accuracy is not automatically worse with a DSLR.

Compared to a full-frame camera with a 50/1.4 and 20/1.7 on a m4/3 camera there is a big difference if you're looking for shallow DOF, slightly less if Leica 25/1.4 is substituted to give the same field-of-view. On an APS-C sensor (which is what m4/3 is pitched against) the only direct equivalent to the Leica lens is the Sigma 30/1.4. Comparing these two setups; the Leica needs only be shot 1/3 stop wider to achieve an almost identical DOF.

It's all a bit academic anyway. The difference is DOF between m4/3 and APS-C really wasn't a consideration when I started using the format.

efoo wrote in post #14386068
Nic, you are convincing me more and more with each of your posted photos, and I may blame you when my wallet is $1400 lighter (for E-M5 with 12-50mm kit lens).

From your photos it seems like Brisbane's weather still warmer than here in Sydney, as expected.

I don't want to be seen to be encouraging you , but JB HiFi was willing to go down to $1300 for the same kit when I ordered mine about two weeks ago. None of the Brisbane stores had them so I had a black kit transferred from the Elizabeth St store in Melbourne. I think one of the Sydney stores had them in stock but I don't know if they would still be prepared to go to the lower price. Olympus is really struggling to supply stock to the USA, not sure how much demand there is in Australia.

Yeah, the weather is still quite warm here. Autumn has been very late to arrive.

Luckypenguin wrote in post #14391397
I don't want to be seen to be encouraging you , but JB HiFi was willing to go down to $1300 for the same kit when I ordered mine about two weeks ago.

I saw Camerapro up at Brisbane has that kit for $1265, however when I called their phone number I received a voice message that the shop is still closed for Easter break.

I am a huge fan of the M43 format especially with the excellent range of lenses available, At present use the Panasonic GX1 with a fair selection of lenses (at times its taken over from the 5D), and thinking that the GX1 would be the one for me for a while, this Olympus pops up and has got me thinking again!!! I`m more than happy with having a 5Dii DSLR and cant see any need to upgrade, for me it does everything I need and more with a DSLR body at the moment, but when it comes to the M43 there is always that little part of me that wants to know how much better the next generation of M43 will be.

I`m taking a trip to New York in September and I`m planning on using an M43 camera for most of the days out. A recent trip to London for the day using just the GX1 has proved to me that the M43 is a highly capable format, and I was able to use the camera in all situations where normaly I would be wishing I had the 5D to hand.

This Olympus is certainly looking very very tempting to me!!!

Loving the colors

EM5 & 12-50mm 32mm f/11 1/100 sec ISO 200

I don't shoot macro that much! but here's one from today. EM-5 - Canon FD 100mm f4 macro lens

EM-5 & Canon FD 100mm f4 Macro

Glen L wrote in post #14407520
I don't shoot macro that much! but here's one from today. EM-5 - Canon FD 100mm f4 macro lens

http://farm9.staticfli​ckr.com …68114390_8ba82d​c4e8_b.jpg

Absolutely gorgeous.

Glen, can you post some examples of what the 12-50 can do in its pseudo-macro mode?

Thanks in advance.

This is Glen's 12-50mm lens in macro mode I believe. Very nice.

Glen L wrote in post #14402180
Loving the colors

EM5 & 12-50mm 32mm f/11 1/100 sec ISO 200