Posts: 6,716
Threads: 236
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
25
09-19-2016, 08:51 PM
(This post was last modified: 09-19-2016, 08:55 PM by Brightcolours.)
$1200 for the 25mm f1.2.
$1300 for the 12-100mm f4...
$300 for the 30mm f3.5 macro.
It is a 1.25x macro lens, not 2.5x magnification (which would be impossible for a 30mm lens). 1.25x is reached at 14mm distance to the subject with the front of the lens.
Posts: 7,876
Threads: 1,812
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
39
Ah, so they cheated again with the mag factor
Posts: 6,716
Threads: 236
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
25
With the small sensor they have the bragging rights for bigger magnification ON PRINT. But they chose to brag the incorrect way. That is the marketing people for you.
Posts: 6,716
Threads: 236
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
25
The 12-100mm f4 zoom lens focusses much closer at 12mm than at 100mm. Interesting but it can be a bit of a bother (I get the same thing when using my 70-200mm with extension tube).
Olympus puts this 24-200mm f8 FF equivalent lens next to a FF 24-70 f4 + 70-200mm f4 combination. A bit silly.
It is more comparable to the likes of Canon EF-M 18-150mm f3.5-6.3 IS STM which is a 14-120mm f2.8-5 MFT equivalent.
The specs show quite a lot of focal length shortening towards minimum focus distance with only 0.21x at 0.45m MFD. A nice lens (focal range and sharpness), shame about the small aperture and high price.
The 30mm macro appears to be a very nice little lens, but no mention of any light accessories to help with illumination with the extremely short subject distance to the front of the lens.
