09-17-2012, 05:24 PM
The 35-100 f/2.8 samples are quite nice, vibrant and sharp wide open!
I appreciate they kept it constant length focusing & zooming. But the price ($1400?) made me cringe, again...
I immediately thought the MFT system is kinda missing a tc x1.4 now, doesn't it? 100mm is perhaps a tad short after pouring so many X-140|150|200|300 mm lenses on our heads. But as equivalences go...
As for the GH3, looks like a solid beast with a properly equipped body (many dials, custom buttons, etc; "imitation is the sincerest form of flattery"). I'm still not sure about the size. On one hand, I feel inclined to agree that it's too big a chunky (ugly?) and that it diminishes the MFT moto, on the other hand, who should care as long as other smaller product lines exist within the same system?
Beefy : http://camerasize.com/compare/#381,289
I'll check that this week end <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />
Greetings,
S.
I appreciate they kept it constant length focusing & zooming. But the price ($1400?) made me cringe, again...
I immediately thought the MFT system is kinda missing a tc x1.4 now, doesn't it? 100mm is perhaps a tad short after pouring so many X-140|150|200|300 mm lenses on our heads. But as equivalences go...
As for the GH3, looks like a solid beast with a properly equipped body (many dials, custom buttons, etc; "imitation is the sincerest form of flattery"). I'm still not sure about the size. On one hand, I feel inclined to agree that it's too big a chunky (ugly?) and that it diminishes the MFT moto, on the other hand, who should care as long as other smaller product lines exist within the same system?
Beefy : http://camerasize.com/compare/#381,289
I'll check that this week end <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />Greetings,
S.