Open Photography Forums  
HOME FORUMS NEWS FAQ SEARCH

Go Back   Open Photography Forums > Digital Camera Discussion > All other DSLR's and Four Thirds, 4/3

All other DSLR's and Four Thirds, 4/3 All DSLRs excluding Canon and Nikon mounts ie Sigma, Pentax, Olympus, Sony, Leica R Back DSLRs and 4/3 System

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old August 15th, 2011, 10:43 AM
fahim mohammed fahim mohammed is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 7,361
Default

Bingo!!

That word, ' envelope ' encompasses what I could not express.

My thanks to Doug.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old August 18th, 2011, 01:07 PM
Mike Shimwell Mike Shimwell is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: North Yorkshire, UK
Posts: 1,792
Default

M9


I'll get nme coat...
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old August 18th, 2011, 02:17 PM
fahim mohammed fahim mohammed is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 7,361
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Shimwell View Post
M9


I'll get nme coat...
Not on my pension Mike!!

Anyway, this is what I am moving towards..

Nex-7 with a 24 mp sensor shall act as a digital back and spare for my M8 and M-lenses as it shall be a backup for my Nikon D700.

I am done chasing digital upgrades. 12mp ff is enough for me.

I am hearing the Leica have stopped manufacture of the MP due to a critical component shortage till
2012.

Maybe the prices shall go thru the roof. So sell my MP, 1/2 M lenses, sell the D700, and 2 F lenses.

Buy a pristine M3 and a 24 mp Nex-7 with adapters. And go on holiday in search of a lost jungle tribe!!

Regards.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old August 18th, 2011, 03:45 PM
Mike Shimwell Mike Shimwell is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: North Yorkshire, UK
Posts: 1,792
Default

M3 and a 50 and a NEX 7 with a Sony lens might well be fine?

You might like an Oly Pen or Panasonic GF1 also. I didn't really get on so stuck to the M stuff.

I met a chap on holiday who was making wet plate portraits and landscapes and carrying an M2 as a walkabout camera, with a modern summarit on it. He left his digital kit at home for work and was driving around the islands in a converted darkvan.

Mike
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old August 18th, 2011, 04:11 PM
Mike Shimwell Mike Shimwell is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: North Yorkshire, UK
Posts: 1,792
Default

Fahim

Mike Johnston's latest column may give you pause for thought.

The two M4/3 lenses he comments on would be sufficient for most of your needs I suspect, and you could add the 0.95/25 voigtlander and the 2/12 Oy if you really wanted. Plus there are M adaptors if you have to.

Just a thought.

Mike
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old August 19th, 2011, 10:01 AM
fahim mohammed fahim mohammed is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 7,361
Default

Mike, thanks for your thoughts.

I shall get a converted van and paint it a dark color too!!

Best.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old August 19th, 2011, 11:26 AM
Jerome Marot Jerome Marot is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Munich, Germany.
Posts: 3,789
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Kerr View Post
I become conscious of the overall "envelope" of the camera (that is, body, current lens, and hood) when I am carrying the camera on a wrist strap (as I will often do when at an "event"). The larger the envelope, the more I have to maneuver it when going through small doorways or through thick crowds. And often young people at full run will collide with it.
Maybe. I don't mind carrying a full-frame DSLR (without grip) around in similar situations.

I have the occasion to physically compare camera size from time to time, because there is a shop not too far away which has quite a few on display to try. The differences between the small SLRs (especially the Olympus 4/3) and the 4/3 aren't as big as one would believe, when you have a viewfinder and lens. Even the Nex (reportedly the smallest around) is not much smaller than a small SLR if you take into account its kit zoom and realize it does not have a viewfinder. Design makes it appear thinner than it really is. And of course the Nex 7 is not there yet, so we don't really know but rumor is that it is not very small, roughly the size of an M8.

I certainly encourage all of you to try to really try various cameras and put them side-by-side (eg on top of each other or the two touching by their bases). I bet you will be surprised.

Of course, one should not forget the lenses. So-called "pancakes" are really smaller. My old 20mm f/2.8 is about a third of the weight and size of the equivalent zoom (16-35 f/2.8).

We should also not forget that the o.p. already has a M8 with primes. This is already a quite small system, when one considers it has a viewfinder and check the size of the lenses.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old August 19th, 2011, 11:52 AM
Asher Kelman Asher Kelman is offline
OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 34,782
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fahim mohammed View Post

The GXR M-module is interesting..very. But there is a cost penalty with this Ricoh system.
Fahim,

I love the idea of the M-module! for me, I already have the GXR body. I'd love to have a long fast lens! However, the cost factor of getting into to Leica lenses is my concern, not the module. I imagine that an 80 mm lens would be very expensive. As the camera is silent, this is a great option for candids.

Asher
__________________
Follow us on Twitter at @opfweb

Our purpose is getting to an impressive photograph. So we encourage browsing and then feedback. Consider a link to your galleries annotated, C&C welcomed. Images posted within OPF are assumed to be for Comment & Critique, unless otherwise designated.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old August 19th, 2011, 12:50 PM
Mike Shimwell Mike Shimwell is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: North Yorkshire, UK
Posts: 1,792
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Asher Kelman View Post
Fahim,

I love the idea of the M-module! for me, I already have the GXR body. I'd love to have a long fast lens! However, the cost factor of getting into to Leica lenses is my concern, not the module. I imagine that an 80 mm lens would be very expensive. As the camera is silent, this is a great option for candids.

Asher

Asher

I bought a Leica Elmarit 4/135 for 150 delivered. It's in excellent condition and focuses perfectly on my M9. The downside (if you think of it as such) is that it's not a telephoto design so is quite long and was made in about 1960. It draws beautifully - see below

Mike


iso 2500 100%



Full frame



Something different

Fahim, if you don't want your thread poluted with pictures just let me know:)
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old August 19th, 2011, 12:53 PM
Asher Kelman Asher Kelman is offline
OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 34,782
Default

Mike,

I remember that middle picture; still like it very much! Yes the lens does a good job.

Looking at KEH.com:

135 F2.8 ELMARIT (CANADA) (SERIES 7) BGN $310.00 (has two auxillar lenses to correct rangefinder optics for this lens)

135 F4 ELMAR WETZLAR (39) BGN $299.00

Thanks,

Asher
__________________
Follow us on Twitter at @opfweb

Our purpose is getting to an impressive photograph. So we encourage browsing and then feedback. Consider a link to your galleries annotated, C&C welcomed. Images posted within OPF are assumed to be for Comment & Critique, unless otherwise designated.
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old August 19th, 2011, 12:53 PM
Murray Foote Murray Foote is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canberra, Australia
Posts: 394
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerome Marot View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Kerr View Post
I become conscious of the overall "envelope" of the camera (that is, body, current lens, and hood) when I am carrying the camera on a wrist strap (as I will often do when at an "event"). The larger the envelope, the more I have to maneuver it when going through small doorways or through thick crowds. And often young people at full run will collide with it.
Maybe. I don't mind carrying a full-frame DSLR (without grip) around in similar situations.
As official photographer at three or four Blues Festivals I normally carry something like a Nikon D3s, 17-35mm f2.8, 50mm f1.4G, 85mm f1.4G, 105mm f2, 180mm f2.8, a monopod and a beltpack. I don't find this a problem and am able to move through quite dense crowds with this.

For that matter, in the 80s I used to go walking for up to five days with a 25 kilo pack including a 5x4 system and tripod of 15 kilos. I wouldn't carry as much these days but am still prepared to carry quite a heavy pack where I believe useful.

That's for landscape, of course, and not appropriate for street photography. I've come to realise the usefulness of a small light camera for when walking around cities and expecting to get one relatively soon. I'm visiting New York in October and Japan in February. I'm not looking to replace my DSLR system but to add a compact complementary street camera. My main criteria are pocketability, image quality and low light sensitivity.

I think the drawback of the 4/3 cameras and mini-APS is that the bodies are probably smaller than I would prefer and only the pancake lenses make them pocketable. I suspect that Olympus may be the better way to go with 4/3, even if Panasonic works out to have better bodies, because the in-body stabilisation should make for smaller prime lenses.

At the moment, though, I'm hoping that the rumour will be correct that says that on August 24th, Sony will announce the NEX-7 with 24MP sensor, extended light sensitivity, a viewfinder maybe even like the Fujifilm X100, larger body and much less menu-driven than the NEX-5. An NEX-7 should be pocketable enough with the 16mm pancake plus another lens in another pocket depending on what gets released. Unfortunately, the rumour also says not available until early November, just after I come back from New York, so I still may need to consider an interim solution. I suppose one advantage is that we're staying just two blocks from B&H so I have the option of delaying the decision until then.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old August 19th, 2011, 01:16 PM
Mike Shimwell Mike Shimwell is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: North Yorkshire, UK
Posts: 1,792
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Asher Kelman View Post
Mike,

I remember that middle picture; still like it very much! Yes the lens does a good job.

Looking at KEH.com:

135 F2.8 ELMARIT (CANADA) (SERIES 7) BGN $310.00 (has two auxillar lenses to correct rangefinder optics for this lens)

135 F4 ELMAR WETZLAR (39) BGN $299.00

Thanks,

Asher

Asher, the 'goggles and 2.8 aperture make it a bit big for an rf lens. The 'f4 series' is basically:

4/135 Hektor old fashioned look
4/135 Elmar - excellent lens if you are happy with the length. Focus action is long throw too.
4/135 Tele-Elmar - telephoto (shorter physically). Said to be similar in performance to Elmar, but may be slightly sharper wide open? Two versions are opticaly identical, but one looks older fashioned.
3.4/135 Tele-Elmarit - fabulously expensive, fabulously sharp at all apertures, probably apo corrected etc etc . DON'T photograph your wife or daughters with this lens:)

Mike
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old August 19th, 2011, 01:36 PM
fahim mohammed fahim mohammed is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 7,361
Default

Mike, do not remove anything from this thread esp. your beautiful daughters pls.

Congrats on your M9 Mike.

As I said. I am confused..so many choices!!

Murray, wait till you get to NYC. See what is available by then.

Regards.

Asher, the 80mm is an R lens!!
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old August 19th, 2011, 02:39 PM
Jerome Marot Jerome Marot is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Munich, Germany.
Posts: 3,789
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Asher Kelman View Post
I love the idea of the M-module! for me, I already have the GXR body. I'd love to have a long fast lens! However, the cost factor of getting into to Leica lenses is my concern, not the module. I imagine that an 80 mm lens would be very expensive. As the camera is silent, this is a great option for candids.
The M-module includes a focal plane shutter and therefore will be as noisy as 4/3 or NEX systems. You can get an Olympus EP-1 or 2 or a NEX-3 plus an adapter for less than the price of a M-module.

As to long fast lenses... all 135mm are optically excellent, Leitz or else.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old August 19th, 2011, 02:58 PM
Jerome Marot Jerome Marot is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Munich, Germany.
Posts: 3,789
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Murray Foote View Post
As official photographer at three or four Blues Festivals I normally carry something like a Nikon D3s, 17-35mm f2.8, 50mm f1.4G, 85mm f1.4G, 105mm f2, 180mm f2.8, a monopod and a beltpack. I don't find this a problem and am able to move through quite dense crowds with this.

For that matter, in the 80s I used to go walking for up to five days with a 25 kilo pack including a 5x4 system and tripod of 15 kilos. I wouldn't carry as much these days but am still prepared to carry quite a heavy pack where I believe useful.
For the record: I carried a tripod, panoramic head, full frame camera and two lenses today. Temperature was over 30C. This was not fun.
I rarely carry that much of a weight, usually.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Murray Foote View Post
That's for landscape, of course, and not appropriate for street photography. I've come to realise the usefulness of a small light camera for when walking around cities and expecting to get one relatively soon. I'm visiting New York in October and Japan in February. I'm not looking to replace my DSLR system but to add a compact complementary street camera. My main criteria are pocketability, image quality and low light sensitivity.
But this is not what I said. If one compares a full-fledged full-frame DSLR system, with tripod and a bunch of zooms, to a 4/3 camera with a pancake lens, obviously the 4/3 camera is lighter. This stays true if the 4/3 camera is used with the universal zoom diptych: 14-42 + 40-140. But this is comparing apples to oranges, the small zooms are much smaller than your typical 24-70 f/2.8 full-frame pro zoom.

What I am saying is that:
-if one compares a 4/3 system with its kit lens to a small, entry-level DSLR with its kit lens, the difference is surprisingly small
-if one already uses a M8 with primes, a 4/3 with a viewfinder and primes will not be much smaller / lighter (basically only the Panasonic GHx have built-in viewfinders)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Murray Foote View Post
I think the drawback of the 4/3 cameras and mini-APS is that the bodies are probably smaller than I would prefer and only the pancake lenses make them pocketable. I suspect that Olympus may be the better way to go with 4/3, even if Panasonic works out to have better bodies, because the in-body stabilisation should make for smaller prime lenses.
Panasonic prime lenses are not stabilized in general (except the 45mm macro)
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old August 19th, 2011, 03:11 PM
Mike Shimwell Mike Shimwell is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: North Yorkshire, UK
Posts: 1,792
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerome Marot View Post
The M-module includes a focal plane shutter and therefore will be as noisy as 4/3 or NEX systems. You can get an Olympus EP-1 or 2 or a NEX-3 plus an adapter for less than the price of a M-module.

As to long fast lenses... all 135mm are optically excellent, Leitz or else.

Jerome, I should point out that I was not claiming any inherent Leitz superiority. The 135 is my only Leitz/Leica lens in fact:)

Mike
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old August 19th, 2011, 03:15 PM
Mike Shimwell Mike Shimwell is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: North Yorkshire, UK
Posts: 1,792
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerome Marot View Post
What I am saying is that:
-if one compares a 4/3 system with its kit lens to a small, entry-level DSLR with its kit lens, the difference is surprisingly small
-if one already uses a M8 with primes, a 4/3 with a viewfinder and primes will not be much smaller / lighter (basically only the Panasonic GHx have built-in viewfinders)

I try to avoid too much weight these days, also bulk can mitigate against my happiness.

I've also done the M4/3 vs M camera comparison and prefer the M for a number of reasons, including viewing system and the slightly larger size that fits my hands better.

Horses for courses.

Mike
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old August 19th, 2011, 03:21 PM
Jerome Marot Jerome Marot is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Munich, Germany.
Posts: 3,789
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Shimwell View Post
Jerome, I should point out that I was not claiming any inherent Leitz superiority. The 135 is my only Leitz/Leica lens in fact:)
No need to point that out. I am perfectly ready to admit that Leitz makes amongst the finest lenses there are. It just is that this particular focal length (in 35mm format) is relatively easy to design and, consequently, all 135mm are optically excellent.

Some are more interesting than others, though. This is the focal length of the bokeh optimization and f/2.0 or faster lenses usable for astronomy with pinpoint stars up to the corners of the frame...
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old August 20th, 2011, 12:08 AM
Murray Foote Murray Foote is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canberra, Australia
Posts: 394
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Murray Foote View Post
That's for landscape, of course, and not appropriate for street photography. I've come to realise the usefulness of a small light camera for when walking around cities and expecting to get one relatively soon. I'm visiting New York in October and Japan in February. I'm not looking to replace my DSLR system but to add a compact complementary street camera. My main criteria are pocketability, image quality and low light sensitivity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerome Marot View Post
But this is not what I said. If one compares a full-fledged full-frame DSLR system, with tripod and a bunch of zooms, to a 4/3 camera with a pancake lens, obviously the 4/3 camera is lighter. This stays true if the 4/3 camera is used with the universal zoom diptych: 14-42 + 40-140. But this is comparing apples to oranges, the small zooms are much smaller than your typical 24-70 f/2.8 full-frame pro zoom.

What I am saying is that:
-if one compares a 4/3 system with its kit lens to a small, entry-level DSLR with its kit lens, the difference is surprisingly small
-if one already uses a M8 with primes, a 4/3 with a viewfinder and primes will not be much smaller / lighter (basically only the Panasonic GHx have built-in viewfinders)
All good points. I wasn't responding to your comments in that paragraph, just making a general comment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Murray Foote View Post
I suspect that Olympus may be the better way to go with 4/3, even if Panasonic works out to have better bodies, because the in-body stabilisation should make for smaller prime lenses.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerome Marot View Post
Panasonic prime lenses are not stabilized in general (except the 45mm macro)
Point taken. I've only just started to consider this area.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old August 20th, 2011, 12:59 AM
Asher Kelman Asher Kelman is offline
OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 34,782
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerome Marot View Post
The M-module includes a focal plane shutter and therefore will be as noisy as 4/3 or NEX systems. You can get an Olympus EP-1 or 2 or a NEX-3 plus an adapter for less than the price of a M-module.

As to long fast lenses... all 135mm are optically excellent, Leitz or else.
Jerome,

The Ricoh GXR focal plane shutter does not need to be used. Instead one can use the electronic shutter and then it's silent. That's the attraction to me. If the Leica had been silent, then I'd have already bought one. Taking pictures during a classical concert or recital the click of the shutter can be disturbing!

The GXR is perfect in these circumstances.

Asher
__________________
Follow us on Twitter at @opfweb

Our purpose is getting to an impressive photograph. So we encourage browsing and then feedback. Consider a link to your galleries annotated, C&C welcomed. Images posted within OPF are assumed to be for Comment & Critique, unless otherwise designated.
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old August 20th, 2011, 01:09 AM
Jerome Marot Jerome Marot is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Munich, Germany.
Posts: 3,789
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Asher Kelman View Post
The Ricoh GXR focal plane shutter does not need to be used. Instead one can use the electronic shutter and then it's silent.
Indeed. Thanks for the correction, I did not know that.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old August 26th, 2011, 01:16 AM
Jerome Marot Jerome Marot is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Munich, Germany.
Posts: 3,789
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fahim mohammed View Post
Anyway, this is what I am moving towards..

Nex-7 with a 24 mp sensor shall act as a digital back and spare for my M8 and M-lenses as it shall be a backup for my Nikon D700.

Since we know the dimensions of the Nex-7, we can now give a comparison between the M8 with a lens and a Nex-7 with the same Leica lens on an adaptor:

Width: -2cm
Height: -1.5cm

(Depth stays the same, since it is basically defined by the distance between the front of the lens and the sensor, which must stay the same)

Weight is roughly cut in half for the bodies.

Manual focus should be relatively easy using peaking in the viewfinder. You have separate controls for aperture and speed. The big unknown is the quality of the viewfinder, which will certainly not be as good as the one of the M8: according to Luminous Landscape it is not as good as the one of the A900, which is itself not as good as the one of the M8, so...

In short: if you can live with an electronic viewfinder, the Nex-7 looks like a lighter M8 indeed.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old August 26th, 2011, 02:21 AM
Murray Foote Murray Foote is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canberra, Australia
Posts: 394
Default

Though not quite so compelling if you don't have Leica M lenses because the Sony lens coverage is sparse and patchy and the 16mm pancake especially is poor to mediocre according to the tests.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old August 26th, 2011, 08:08 AM
Doug Kerr Doug Kerr is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Alamogordo, New Mexico, USA
Posts: 8,565
Default

Hi, Asher,

Quote:
Originally Posted by Asher Kelman View Post
The Ricoh GXR focal plane shutter does not need to be used. Instead one can use the electronic shutter and then it's silent.
Do you have any insight into the relative implications of using the optical shutter and not?

Why, for example, would we use the FP shutter at all? Is it just to protect the sensor from damage if the camera is pointed at the sun?

Best regards,

Doug
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old August 26th, 2011, 08:39 AM
Doug Kerr Doug Kerr is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Alamogordo, New Mexico, USA
Posts: 8,565
Default

Hi, Asher,

I am a little confused by the Ricoh GXR modules.

It seems as if there are at least three called "A12", one with a 50 mm lens, one with a 28-mm lens, and one (newly released) with an "M" mount. Is that so?

Which of the GXR modules (if not all) offer the electronic shutter mode? I have only so found reference to that in connection with the A12 M mount module.

Which module do you have?

Thanks.

Best regards,

Doug
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old August 26th, 2011, 09:27 AM
Doug Kerr Doug Kerr is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Alamogordo, New Mexico, USA
Posts: 8,565
Default

I note that with respect to the Ricoh GXR A12 M mount module (the only one for which I have so far found any information on an electronic shutter mode) the rated shutter speed ranges are:

Focal-plane shutter: 1/4000" - 180"
Electronic shutter: 1/8000" - 1"

Interesting.

The A12 series of modules seem to all have a sensor size of 23.6 mm 15.7 mm ("1.52x").

Best regards,

Doug
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old August 26th, 2011, 10:30 AM
Doug Kerr Doug Kerr is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Alamogordo, New Mexico, USA
Posts: 8,565
Default

Oh, I see the discussion was about the M-mount A12 module. Sorry!

Best regards,

Doug
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old August 26th, 2011, 11:53 AM
jake klein jake klein is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: minnesota
Posts: 747
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Asher Kelman View Post
Jerome,

The Ricoh GXR focal plane shutter does not need to be used. Instead one can use the electronic shutter and then it's silent. That's the attraction to me. If the Leica had been silent, then I'd have already bought one. Taking pictures during a classical concert or recital the click of the shutter can be disturbing!

The GXR is perfect in these circumstances.

Asher
Asher have you thought about one of these for your canon?

http://www.soundblimp.com/

or this one which is not soundproof like the one above but close to it.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001DIWMR2
__________________
Best Regards,
Jake

http://www.flickr.com/photos/jakekleinphotography/
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old August 26th, 2011, 02:56 PM
Jerome Marot Jerome Marot is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Munich, Germany.
Posts: 3,789
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Murray Foote View Post
Though not quite so compelling if you don't have Leica M lenses because the Sony lens coverage is sparse and patchy and the 16mm pancake especially is poor to mediocre according to the tests.
Fahim Mohammed is especially looking for a camera to use with his Leica M lenses, so I am answering that particular question. And, BTW, the Sony 16mm is not as bad as some tests would like you to believe...
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old August 26th, 2011, 09:47 PM
fahim mohammed fahim mohammed is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 7,361
Default

Read the specs of the Nex-7. Not impressed at all. Did you see the A-lens adapter.
I shall start saving for the EP-3 and the 45/1.8 plus an M-adapter from Panasonic.

Yea, it is 12mp only, but I am ok with it. It has built in VR.

That and my M8 or film M with a 35 and a 50 is it. Or maybe just the 35mm ( ff equiv ).

G3 VR is lens dependent and I am not interested in it either.

I can easily go to A3 with either of these. I usually hang A4.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are Off
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:22 AM.


Posting images or text grants license to OPF, yet of such remain with its creator. Still, all assembled discussion 2006-2017 Asher Kelman (all rights reserved) Posts with new theme or unusual image might be moved/copied to a new thread!