[Klaus]

Quite slow speed but I guess they want to keep it tiny. Powerzoom - sounds a bit like the Pana X14-42 pancake zoom.



Ref.:

http://www.43rumors.com/ft4-new-olympus-...ull-specs/

[Sylvain]

I think f/5.6 is the killing limit on Oly cameras and f/6.3 is going that tiny bit too far IMHO.

But we'll see !

[Klaus]

[quote name='Sylvain' timestamp='1323794130' post='13705']

I think f/5.6 is the killing limit on Oly cameras and f/6.3 is going that tiny bit too far IMHO.

But we'll see !

[/quote]



The usual f/5.6 AF limit does not apply to mirrorless cameras.

[Sylvain]

I wasn't talking about that. I was referring to the "noise" limit. Any grey/rainy day at 5.6 ends up hitting the 800/1600 ISO limit pretty quickly for an acceptable shutter speed for the typical focal length associated with the f/5.6 aperture.

e.g. we could use something like f/4 at 40-50mm for those times.

[boren]

Sylvain, in what lighting conditions and ISO setting would an f/4.0 lens for m43 be sufficient and an f/5.6 lens won't?

[Guest]

While having 12mm at the short end is nice for a walk-around (kit) lens the other features turn me off. Powerzoom, f/6.3? No thanks to both.

[dhazeghi]

[quote name='Klaus' timestamp='1323792684' post='13704']

Quite slow speed but I guess they want to keep it tiny. Powerzoom - sounds a bit like the Pana X14-42 pancake zoom.

[/quote]



Hope it's small! Otherwise, it's going to be hard to get excited about a 24-100 f/7-13 equivalent...



DH

[Sylvain]

[quote name='boren' timestamp='1323804131' post='13710']

Sylvain, in what lighting conditions and ISO setting would an f/4.0 lens for m43 be sufficient and an f/5.6 lens won't?

[/quote]



It's not about being sufficient, it's about being better.

[joachim]

[quote name='Sylvain' timestamp='1323794130' post='13705']

I think f/5.6 is the killing limit on Oly cameras and f/6.3 is going that tiny bit too far IMHO.

But we'll see !

[/quote]





I think a lot depends on the nature of the product. For another plastic-fantastic this would be ok, for a premium product I think that is a bit poor. For a premium product even f/5.6 would be a bit slow on my books.

[boren]

[quote name='Sylvain' timestamp='1323808832' post='13717']

It's not about being sufficient, it's about being better.

[/quote]



By that definition you should rule out f/4.0 lenses and only look at f/2.8 ones... or rule out f/2.8 lenses and only look at f/2.0 ones... and so on and so forth...



What is your benchmark that makes f/4.0 lenses worthy of purchase but not ones starting at f/5.6?