Re: OT - Olympus Micro 4/3 system - lenses?

On 1/27/2016 6:44 AM, Steve Cottrell wrote: > > Apologies for the OT subject - I seem to recall there are some micro > > 4/3rds users in the list? > > > > Was looking at the spec for the new Olympus Pen F - are there any primes > > lenses available in the

Re: OT - Olympus Micro 4/3 system - lenses?

OT subject - I seem to recall there are some micro >> 4/3rds users in the list? >> >> Was looking at the spec for the new Olympus Pen F - are there any primes >> lenses available in the 4/3 format, specifically primes, that >> incorporate manual focus with aperture rings? &

Re: OT - Olympus Micro 4/3 system - lenses?

OT subject - I seem to recall there are some micro 4/3rds users in the list? Was looking at the spec for the new Olympus Pen F - are there any primes lenses available in the 4/3 format, specifically primes, that incorporate manual focus with aperture rings? TIA -- I don't want to achie

Re: OT - Olympus Micro 4/3 system - lenses?

Once again, Steve comes up trumps. Many thanks for the info! On 27/1/16, steve harley, discombobulated, unleashed: >here's a fairly complete list of lenses that come with m43 mount; note the >manual focus section, all of which are primes and many of which have >aperture rings: > >

Re: OT - Olympus Micro 4/3 system - lenses?

On 2016-01-27 4:44 , Steve Cottrell wrote: Was looking at the spec for the new Olympus Pen F - are there any primes lenses available in the 4/3 format, specifically primes, that incorporate manual focus with aperture rings? here's a fairly complete list of lenses that come with m43 mount;

Re: OT - Olympus Micro 4/3 system - lenses?

On 27/1/16, Godfrey DiGiorgi, discombobulated, unleashed: >An Olympus Pen-F body with the set of Voigtländer lenses would be a >superb performing kit. Interesting - thanks muchly. -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__Broadcast, Corporate, || (O) |Web Video Production --

Re: OT - Olympus Micro 4/3 system - lenses?

> On Jan 27, 2016, at 3:44 AM, Steve Cottrell wrote: > > Apologies for the OT subject - I seem to recall there are some micro > 4/3rds users in the list? > > Was looking at the spec for the new Olympus Pen F - are there any primes > lenses available in the 4/3 format, spec

Re: OT - Olympus Micro 4/3 system - lenses?

On 27/1/16, Donald Guthrie, discombobulated, unleashed: >Cotty, my quick answer is yes. But I don't have the bag with me. If no >one else chimes in I will reply with a definite later. Hi Don Thanks for that. I've been doing a bit of research and there are lenses such as Voigtlanders that will f

Re: OT - Olympus Micro 4/3 system - lenses?

bject: OT - Olympus Micro 4/3 system - lenses? Message-ID:<20160127114433.860866...@newsmtp.blacknight.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Apologies for the OT subject - I seem to recall there are some micro 4/3rds users in the list? Was looking at the spec for the new Olymp

OT - Olympus Micro 4/3 system - lenses?

Apologies for the OT subject - I seem to recall there are some micro 4/3rds users in the list? Was looking at the spec for the new Olympus Pen F - are there any primes lenses available in the 4/3 format, specifically primes, that incorporate manual focus with aperture rings? TIA -- Cheers

Re: micro 4/3 body, only $159???

2, at 11:28 AM, P. J. Alling wrote: > I've never dealt with Cameta, I don't know if they're reliable or not. You > will need a lens however, what are they asking for one? > > On 4/24/2012 2:48 PM, J.C. O'Connell wrote: >> http://www.cameta.com/Olympus-Pe

Re: micro 4/3 body, only $159???

You could always side step the whole issue by getting one of these, a Leica D Vario-Elmar 14-150mm f/3.5-5.6 Asph. OIS. Then you'd be spending maybe 10-20 times the money for a lens than you had on the body, but you'd probably never need another lens, though you would need a 4

Re: micro 4/3 body, only $159???

On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 1:41 PM, J.C. O'Connell wrote: > thats a pretty good deal but it sucks when the kit lens costs nearly > as much as the digital body I was going to say that it sucks that a Canon FD mount adapter costs nearly as much as the body. (The first one I saw at B&H was $179, b

RE: micro 4/3 body, only $159???

esday, April 25, 2012 1:27 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: micro 4/3 body, only $159??? On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 1:11 PM, Steven Desjardins wrote: > You can get the kit zoom under $200 or the 17 mm for ~$250 new.  I haven't checked > used prices.  The trick is that brings

Re: micro 4/3 body, only $159???

On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 1:11 PM, Steven Desjardins wrote: > You can get the kit zoom under $200 or the 17 mm for ~$250 new.  I haven't > checked > used prices.  The trick is that brings the total up to $350-400, and there > are E-Pl2 kits > fro only a little more. Instead of buying separately,

Re: micro 4/3 body, only $159???

; - >> >> -Original Message- >> From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of P. >> J. Alling >> Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2012 11:29 AM >> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> Subject: Re: micro 4/3 body, only $

RE: micro 4/3 body, only $159???

the video feature might be fun to play with... dont like the 2.0 crop factor though, it means you need really wide angle lenses for normal usage. - J.C.O'Connell hifis...@gate.net - -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/

RE: micro 4/3 body, only $159???

P. J. Alling Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2012 12:29 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: micro 4/3 body, only $159??? Well the adapters sell for either expensive or cheep, nothing in between it seems. On 4/25/2012 12:21 PM, J.C. O'Connell wrote: > with these m4/3 bodies you can get

Re: micro 4/3 body, only $159???

.@gate.net - -Original Message- From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of P. J. Alling Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2012 11:29 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: micro 4/3 body, only $159??? I've never dealt with Cameta, I don't know

RE: micro 4/3 body, only $159???

Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2012 11:29 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: micro 4/3 body, only $159??? I've never dealt with Cameta, I don't know if they're reliable or not. You will need a lens however, what are they asking for one? On 4/24/2012 2:48 PM, J.C. O&#

Re: micro 4/3 body, only $159???

I've never dealt with Cameta, I don't know if they're reliable or not. You will need a lens however, what are they asking for one? On 4/24/2012 2:48 PM, J.C. O'Connell wrote: http://www.cameta.com/Olympus-Pen-E-PL1-Micro-4-3-Digital-Camera-B

Re: micro 4/3 body, only $159???

> > his 25/0.95 lens, my friend Marco's u4/3 body is just shy of working for > > dance photography. > > > > > > On Apr 24, 2012, at 11:48 AM, J.C. O'Connell wrote: > > > >> http://www.cameta.com/Olympus-Pen-E-PL1-

Re: micro 4/3 body, only $159???

there are now > u4/3 bodies with what I'd consider usable low light performance.  Even with > his 25/0.95 lens, my friend Marco's u4/3 body is just shy of working for > dance photography. > > > On Apr 24, 2012, at 11:48 AM, J.C. O'Connell wrote: > >> h

Re: micro 4/3 body, only $159???

of working for dance photography. On Apr 24, 2012, at 11:48 AM, J.C. O'Connell wrote: > http://www.cameta.com/Olympus-Pen-E-PL1-Micro-4-3-Digital-Camera-Body-Black- > 66752.cfm > > - > J.C.O'Connell > hifis...@gate.net > - > &g

micro 4/3 body, only $159???

http://www.cameta.com/Olympus-Pen-E-PL1-Micro-4-3-Digital-Camera-Body-Black- 66752.cfm - J.C.O'Connell hifis...@gate.net - -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please

Re: For those using Pentax lenses on micro 4/3

Miserere wrote: Oh, that's not a screw, that's the lever that slides the locking pin down so you can unmount the lens from the adapter. It serves the same function as the locking pin on your Pentax camera mount. No, no, I understand that control you point to. I meant the smaller (much smaller)

Re: For those using Pentax lenses on micro 4/3

On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 9:08 AM, Miserere wrote: > Oh, that's not a screw, that's the lever that slides the locking pin > down so you can unmount the lens from the adapter. It serves the same > function as the locking pin on your Pentax camera mount. He's not talking about that. He's talking abou

Re: For those using Pentax lenses on micro 4/3

m A Quest for Photographic Enlightenment On 26 January 2011 02:05, Dario Bonazza wrote: > Hi Miserere, > > Look at the third picture here: > http://cgi.ebay.it/Pentax-PK-Lens-To-Micro-4-3-m4-3-Adapter-GF1-E-P1-EP2-/290480031613 > It's that small screw on the m4/3 bayonet.

Re: For those using Pentax lenses on micro 4/3

On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 10:07 AM, Dario Bonazza wrote: > What's the intended use of the "stop screw" that sellers boast on their > adapters? I see there is a small screw on the m4/3 bayonet (head outward): > is that the stop screw? How would you use it? Thanks a lot. The little screw is the stop o

Re: For those using Pentax lenses on micro 4/3

Darren Addy wrote: The stop screw prevents your lens from twisting too far, when you're removing it. People who have adapters without the stop screw say: "since it does not have a "stop" screw it continuously turns on the camera mount when you try to remove it. It makes it hard to find the spot

Re: For those using Pentax lenses on micro 4/3

The stop screw prevents your lens from twisting too far, when you're removing it. People who have adapters without the stop screw say: "since it does not have a "stop" screw it continuously turns on the camera mount when you try to remove it. It makes it hard to find the spot to release the lens.

Re: For those using Pentax lenses on micro 4/3

Hi Miserere, Look at the third picture here: http://cgi.ebay.it/Pentax-PK-Lens-To-Micro-4-3-m4-3-Adapter-GF1-E-P1-EP2-/290480031613 It's that small screw on the m4/3 bayonet. I already own such an adapter and I plan to use FA lenses on a Panny GF1 (bought secondhand and arriving here wit

Re: For those using Pentax lenses on micro 4/3

I have no idea what you're talking about, Dario. Is it maybe a stop DOWN screw? I seem to remember some early m4/3 adapters having a screw (as opposed to a ring) to stop down lenses, although I think it was only for rangefinder lenses with short registration distances (and thus very thin adapters).

For those using Pentax lenses on micro 4/3

What's the intended use of the "stop screw" that sellers boast on their adapters? I see there is a small screw on the m4/3 bayonet (head outward): is that the stop screw? How would you use it? Thanks a lot. Dario -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/

Re: OT - 4/3, m4/3

I always preferred "Pentaxpayer". "On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 5:29 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: > Well, it sounds almost as silly as "Pentaxian" ... ;-) >" -- Steve Desjardins -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PD

Re: OT - 4/3, m4/3

From: Cotty On 23/10/10, Godfrey DiGiorgi, discombobulated, unleashed: >"I want to buy a camera ..." > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d76D9V81NvA This video contains content from Comcast Entertainment Group, who has blocked it in your country on copyright grounds. I see that a lot, except

Re: OT - 4/3, m4/3

Well, it sounds almost as silly as "Pentaxian" ... ;-) On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 1:34 PM, John Sessoms wrote: > From: George Sinos >> >> Before everyone gets all excited about brands and sensors, maybe we >> should all read David duChemin's post about switching from Canon to >> Nikon. >> >> While d

Re: OT - 4/3, m4/3

From: George Sinos Before everyone gets all excited about brands and sensors, maybe we should all read David duChemin's post about switching from Canon to Nikon. While duChemin's mantra has always been "Gear is Good, Vision is Better," in this post he adds "Gear is important because it creates

Re: OT - 4/3, m4/3

Most of their stuff is too embarrassing to show to the British. On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 11:03 AM, Cotty wrote: > On 23/10/10, Godfrey DiGiorgi, discombobulated, unleashed: > >>"I want to buy a camera ..." >> >>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d76D9V81NvA > > > This video contains content from Comca

Re: OT - 4/3, m4/3

no idea. I'll nab the .flv, convert it to .m4p, and shoot it to you. ;-) On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 8:03 AM, Cotty wrote: > On 23/10/10, Godfrey DiGiorgi, discombobulated, unleashed: > >>"I want to buy a camera ..." >> >>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d76D9V81NvA > > > This video contains content fr

Re: OT - 4/3, m4/3

On 23/10/10, Godfrey DiGiorgi, discombobulated, unleashed: >"I want to buy a camera ..." > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d76D9V81NvA This video contains content from Comcast Entertainment Group, who has blocked it in your country on copyright grounds. -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O)

Re: OT - 4/3, m4/3

"I want to buy a camera ..." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d76D9V81NvA On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 10:22 PM, Boris Liberman wrote: > On 10/22/2010 7:44 PM, Jaume Lahuerta wrote: >> >> My point is: when the total novice looks at the camerashop and sees a >> Panasonic >> m4/3 and a Samsung or NEX nex

Re: OT - 4/3, m4/3

Before everyone gets all excited about brands and sensors, maybe we should all read David duChemin's post about switching from Canon to Nikon. While duChemin's mantra has always been "Gear is Good, Vision is Better," in this post he adds "Gear is important because it creates the aesthetic which i

RE: OT - 4/3, m4/3

> [...] One of the big logical fallacies I see in gear discussions all the time > is people who can't tell the difference between "this piece of gear is better > for what I need to do" and "this piece of gear is better". > Indeed, and it also consists in comparing a single element of a system, ra

Re: OT - 4/3, m4/3

On Oct 22, 2010, at 10:51 PM, Tom C wrote: > > Who can tell us why 4/3 format is emperically more desirable than an > APS-C sensor? Without bringing the other attributes of a specific > camera body or lens into the discussion It's not an absolute. For the things that Godfrey

Re: OT - 4/3, m4/3

On Oct 22, 2010, at 11:04 PM, Tom C wrote: > > > I'd like to hear why 4/3 is BETTER than APS-C, not why it's NOT LESS. > Quantifiably, why is it NOT LESS? > If more is better, lets compare it with a 645D. It's a bigger sensor with more resolution, therefore its

RE: OT - 4/3, m4/3

re a very unusual camera buyer. > I'd like to hear why 4/3 is BETTER than APS-C, not why it's NOT LESS. > Quantifiably, why is it NOT LESS? you seem to be contradicting yourself here. Still, it's going to depend on what you mean by BETTER - if you want numbers you'll have t

Re: OT - 4/3, m4/3

On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 02:04:39AM -0400, Tom C wrote: > I contend that we haven't moved on beyond megapixel wars and never will. > > All things equal, and even sometimes not, more MP means better resolution, Only if you're able to extract all the resolution that the sensor offers. If you're shoo

Re: OT - 4/3, m4/3

iable degree. If two camera bodies cost approximately the same, and I was going to purchase one of them, I would always opt for the the one with the larger physical sensor/larger megapixel combination. I'd like to hear why 4/3 is BETTER than APS-C, not why it's NOT LESS. Quantifiably, why

Re: OT - 4/3, m4/3

ior to the K7. I've gotten great shots out of a Fuji disposable as well. The question boils down to, what is likely to yield the better image? All things equal, better resolution is the winner (also a lens factor). I find nothing at all compelling about the 4/3 format. It's significantl

Re: OT - 4/3, m4/3

On 10/22/2010 7:44 PM, Jaume Lahuerta wrote: My point is: when the total novice looks at the camerashop and sees a Panasonic m4/3 and a Samsung or NEX next to it, same aspect, same size...he/she is going to ask...'what is the difference between them?' -An informed seller will answer..'well, senso

Re: OT - 4/3, m4/3 (was: OT: new camera)

On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 12:49 PM, Ken Waller wrote: > Godfrey is there a significant delay in the viewing system? > I used a Nikon Coolpix 5700 for several years in my job and while it was a > very good piece for static images - which is all I shot on the job - it was > all but unusable for any ac

Re: OT - 4/3, m4/3 (was: OT: new camera)

release and the image capture - was simply intolerable. Kenneth Waller http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller - Original Message - From: "Godfrey DiGiorgi" Subject: Re: OT - 4/3, m4/3 (was: OT: new camera) Micro-FourThirds is FourThirds revised for all electron

Re: OT - 4/3, m4/3 (was: OT: new camera)

On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 9:08 AM, Jaume Lahuerta wrote: >> It couldn't have been. The development of sufficient  quality >> electronic viewfinders is only now coming to fruition. >> > And for this they had to release a system that wasn't up to its compactness > promises. I guess I never interprete

Re: OT - 4/3, m4/3 (was: OT: new camera)

On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 01:46:04PM -0400, Miserere wrote: > > I agree with your conclusion, Dario. I have a large print (about 35x46 > cm) taken with a 6MP P&S; nobody ever guesses it wasn't taken with a > DSLR. I've got an 8x10 in my portfolio of motorsports images taken using a Canon Powershot

Re: OT - 4/3, m4/3

On 22 October 2010 13:44, Jaume Lahuerta wrote: > Boris, > > I agree with almosl everything you say. Except in very few pictures where AF > is > critical, for innstance, I don't take advantage of my camera by far. > > My point is: when the total novice looks at the camerashop and sees a > Panaso

Re: OT - 4/3, m4/3 (was: OT: new camera)

On 22 October 2010 13:04, Dario Bonazza wrote: > Jaume Lahuerta wrote: > >> Dario's answer is: lens 'ecosystem' and IQ is not that important. > > IQ is important, but it is not always the main factor in determining > success. The other problem with IQ is that it's an intangible quantity that cann

Re: OT - 4/3, m4/3

y should I chose the smaller one? I don't see any reason except Dario's lens ecosystem and, as he also says,...marketing !!... - Mensaje original > De: Boris Liberman > Para: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > Enviado: vie,22 octubre, 2010 18:21 > Asunto: Re: OT - 4

Re: OT - 4/3, m4/3

o be true up to the up > todate-ness of the gear being compared. If you do real life shooting it > is not all that straightforward. Oh, it's pretty straightforward. For everyday use (natural light daytime photography, etc.) and images intended for 8x10 prints or smaller, any of the senso

Re: OT - 4/3, m4/3 (was: OT: new camera)

Jaume Lahuerta wrote: Dario's answer is: lens 'ecosystem' and IQ is not that important. IQ is important, but it is not always the main factor in determining success. Sure IQ is important for us. But we are a minority in the market. Furthermore, if we had to rank the current cameras in order

Re: OT - 4/3, m4/3

the latter every day for past two years I should say, Kia is just fine. By the way, I am not implying here the direct parallel between Merc and APSC or FF and Kia and (m)4/3. In fact, I opine that for 99.9% of hobbyist or amateur photographers, their actual abilities were surpassed when K10D (

Re: OT - 4/3, m4/3 (was: OT: new camera)

. " So, in conclusion...I don't like where the industry is going !! ;-)" I think this is the most accurate statement many could make. I have adapted to my E-p1 and would not hesitate to buy another EVIL/ILC. Since i am obviously not alone, their will be a market for these kinds of systems and the

Re: OT - 4/3, m4/3 (was: OT: new camera)

- Mensaje original > De: Godfrey DiGiorgi > Para: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > Enviado: vie,22 octubre, 2010 17:54 > Asunto: Re: OT - 4/3, m4/3 (was: OT: new camera) > > On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 8:20 AM, Jaume Lahuerta wrote: > > I agree with you and Godfrey

Re: OT - 4/3, m4/3 (was: OT: new camera)

On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 8:20 AM, Jaume Lahuerta wrote: > I agree with you and Godfrey in that m4/3 is what 4/3 should have been from > the > beginning. It couldn't have been. The development of sufficient quality electronic viewfinders is only now coming to fruition. > Bu

Re: OT - 4/3, m4/3 (was: OT: new camera)

d one ot two de-facto standards, like APS-C had (while >m4/3 has some sort of standard) > 3 - Panasonic came into play to rescue poor Olympus. > > I see the future of m4/3 much brighter than any perspective for 4/3 has ever > >been. > I agree with you and Godfre

Re: OT - 4/3, m4/3 (was: OT: new camera)

e market strength of the different brands) which lead me think the m4/3 has more chances of market success than 4/3. As you know, better/worse technology can either have a major impact on sales or a negligible one. Some sale wars are won by a better technology, but most are won by a better percepti

Re: OT - 4/3, m4/3 (was: OT: new camera)

Micro-FourThirds is FourThirds revised for all electronic viewing systems. That's all. All electronic viewing systems are simply more effective for the size of the format than optical reflex view finders. The shorter mount register possible with an all electronic viewfinder is also a better fit fo

OT - 4/3, m4/3 (was: OT: new camera)

t a m-APSC standard would be even worst for m4/3... I don't think so. With their 4/3-system, Olympus tried to break the well-established Canikon APS-C duopolywith a new bayonet and a smaller sensor. Desperate to say the least. The 'micro-systems' arena is a different game, open to differ

Re: Cosina-Voigtlander joins micro-4/3

On 8/30/2010 5:10 PM, Miserere wrote: On 30 August 2010 03:57, Derby Chang wrote: One of my most oft-used lenses, the 77. But a lens on an SLR feels totally different to one on a rangefinder. The 43mm is a perfect case study. Plus... http://www.cafepress.com.au/Robertstech.215310085 Ah yes,

Re: Cosina-Voigtlander joins micro-4/3

On 30 August 2010 03:57, Derby Chang wrote: > > One of my most oft-used lenses, the 77. But a lens on an SLR feels totally > different to one on a rangefinder. The 43mm is a perfect case study. > > Plus... > > http://www.cafepress.com.au/Robertstech.215310085 Ah yes, so true. Well, it must be, it

Re: Cosina-Voigtlander joins micro-4/3

Miserere wrote: On 27 August 2010 05:34, Derby Chang wrote: I'll be rooned. Already preordered the 75/1.8 M. Have you ever considered this little-known lens called Pentax 77 Ltd? ;-) One of my most oft-used lenses, the 77. But a lens on an SLR feels totally different to one o

Re: Cosina-Voigtlander joins micro-4/3

On 27 August 2010 05:34, Derby Chang wrote: > > I'll be rooned. Already preordered the 75/1.8 M. Have you ever considered this little-known lens called Pentax 77 Ltd? ;-) --M. --     \/\/o/\/\ --> http://WorldOfMiserere.com     http://EnticingTheLight.com     A Quest for Photographic Enli

Re: Cosina-Voigtlander joins micro-4/3

On 28 August 2010 14:41, Brendan MacRae wrote: > > > Ok, well, maybe they used to be cheaper than 1200US, not anymore I suppose: > > http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=270604946285 > > eeeks. > > -Brendan I think the guy that's selling that lens was hired by Samsung for their late

Re: Cosina-Voigtlander joins micro-4/3

On Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 2:32 PM, Brendan MacRae wrote: > > > > > - Original Message >> From: Miserere >> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> Sent: Thu, August 26, 2010 6:21:16 AM >> Subject: Cosina-Voigtlander joins micro-4/3 >> >>

Re: Cosina-Voigtlander joins micro-4/3

- Original Message > From: Brendan MacRae > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > Sent: Sat, August 28, 2010 11:32:38 AM > Subject: Re: Cosina-Voigtlander joins micro-4/3 > > > > > > - Original Message > > From: Miserere > > T

Re: Cosina-Voigtlander joins micro-4/3

- Original Message > From: Miserere > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > Sent: Thu, August 26, 2010 6:21:16 AM > Subject: Cosina-Voigtlander joins micro-4/3 > > It's made sense all along: > > http://www.olympus-global.com/en/news/2010b/nr1008

Re: Cosina-Voigtlander joins micro-4/3

Miserere wrote: It's made sense all along: http://www.olympus-global.com/en/news/2010b/nr100826mfourthirdse.html http://www.dpreview.com/news/1008/10082619cosinamicrofourthirds.asp They'll be releasing the Nokton 25mm f/0.95 next month as their first lens (for a little under $1,200). Talk abou

Re: Cosina-Voigtlander joins micro-4/3

On the other hand, it remains to be seen whether the Nokton 25mm f/0.95 an all-manual lens or a dedicated Micro-FourThirds integrated lens with on-body aperture control and lens correction metadata included. The Summilux-D 25mm f/1.4 ASPH is not only one of the most beautiful imaging normal lenses

Re: Cosina-Voigtlander joins micro-4/3

On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 9:56 AM, Boris Liberman wrote: > On 8/26/2010 4:21 PM, Miserere wrote: >> >> It's made sense all along: >> >> http://www.olympus-global.com/en/news/2010b/nr100826mfourthirdse.html >> >> http://www.dpreview.com/news/1008/10082619cosinamicrofourthirds.asp >> >> They'll be rel

Re: Cosina-Voigtlander joins micro-4/3

On 8/26/2010 4:21 PM, Miserere wrote: It's made sense all along: http://www.olympus-global.com/en/news/2010b/nr100826mfourthirdse.html http://www.dpreview.com/news/1008/10082619cosinamicrofourthirds.asp They'll be releasing the Nokton 25mm f/0.95 next month as their first lens (for a little un

Cosina-Voigtlander joins micro-4/3

It's made sense all along: http://www.olympus-global.com/en/news/2010b/nr100826mfourthirdse.html http://www.dpreview.com/news/1008/10082619cosinamicrofourthirds.asp They'll be releasing the Nokton 25mm f/0.95 next month as their first lens (for a little under $1,200). Talk about entering the are

Re: OT sigma primes on 4/3

Thanks, Sandy, Godfrey and Bob. I've forwarded along your replies. Much appreciated. On 11/30/08, Scott Loveless <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Howdy. > > A friend of mine has an Olympus something-or-other 4/3 camera and is > shopping for a "normal" prime. He

RE: OT sigma primes on 4/3

I've never heard of either of them - sorry. I would consider the Olympus 25/2.8 pancake (consumer lens, slow), or the Panasonic/Leica 25/1.4 - high quality, big, expensive. Bob > > Howdy. > > A friend of mine has an Olympus something-or-other 4/3 camera and is > shopping

Re: OT sigma primes on 4/3

On Nov 30, 2008, at 7:23 PM, Scott Loveless wrote: A friend of mine has an Olympus something-or-other 4/3 camera and is shopping for a "normal" prime. He's narrowed it down to either the 30mm F1.4 EX DC HSM or the 24mm F1.8 EX DG ASPHERICAL MACRO. Since a few of you either ha

Re: OT sigma primes on 4/3

On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 11:23 AM, Scott Loveless <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Howdy. > > A friend of mine has an Olympus something-or-other 4/3 camera and is > shopping for a "normal" prime. He's narrowed it down to either the > 30mm F1.4 EX DC HSM or the 24mm F

OT sigma primes on 4/3

Howdy. A friend of mine has an Olympus something-or-other 4/3 camera and is shopping for a "normal" prime. He's narrowed it down to either the 30mm F1.4 EX DC HSM or the 24mm F1.8 EX DG ASPHERICAL MACRO. Since a few of you either have or had these lenses or 4/3 bodies, I told

RE: What do you all think of the micro 4/3 system?

2008 9:51 AM > To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List' > Subject: RE: What do you all think of the micro 4/3 system? > > That's certainly one of the disadvantages that I've found with my 4/3 > cameras. Although the viewfinders are pretty good, manual focusing is far >

RE: What do you all think of the micro 4/3 system?

That's certainly one of the disadvantages that I've found with my 4/3 cameras. Although the viewfinders are pretty good, manual focusing is far easier on something like the LX or MX. The Olympus E-3 magnifies the viewfinder image 1.5 times, which is an improvement, but still not up ther

RE: What do you all think of the micro 4/3 system?

l.net Subject: Re: What do you all think of the micro 4/3 system? From: Jaume Lahuerta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > And, if they were once, it was many years ago, when people here was > worried about what their brand offered form a technical point of > view. Now or they don't care m

Re: What do you all think of the micro 4/3 system?

n Sessoms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Para: pdml@pdml.net Enviado: martes, 21 de octubre, 2008 13:52:32 Asunto: Re: What do you all think of the micro 4/3 system? From: "John Celio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I imagine threads like this on the PDML are making Pentax a little worried. I imagine

Re: What do you all think of the micro 4/3 system?

On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 2:48 PM, Joseph McAllister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > They are probably "barely" noticeable when it comes to design and R&D > suggestions, as those departments are several years ahead of consumer > product introductions. But as my post regarding EXIF problems in Aperture

Re: What do you all think of the micro 4/3 system?

On Oct 21, 2008, at 06:03 , John Sessoms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: From: "John Celio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I imagine threads like this on the PDML are making Pentax a little worried. I imagine threads on the PDML are barely noticeable to Pentax. They are probably "barely" noticeable when

Re: What do you all think of the micro 4/3 system?

- Original Message - From: "Matthew Hunt" Subject: Re: What do you all think of the micro 4/3 system? On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 1:20 AM, William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: So, with that in mind: Ned Bunnel, Ned Bunnell, Ned Bunnell, Ned Bunnell. Is that

Re: What do you all think of the micro 4/3 system?

- Original Message - From: "Jaume Lahuerta" Subject: Re: What do you all think of the micro 4/3 system? And, if they were once, it was many years ago, when people here was worried about what their brand offered form a technical point of view. Now or they don't care m

Re: What do you all think of the micro 4/3 system?

On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 1:20 AM, William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So, with that in mind: > > Ned Bunnel, Ned Bunnell, Ned Bunnell, Ned Bunnell. Is that like Beetlejuice, Beetlejuice, Beetlejuice? -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.n

Re: What do you all think of the micro 4/3 system?

- Original Message - From: "John Sessoms" Subject: Re: What do you all think of the micro 4/3 system? From: "John Celio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I imagine threads like this on the PDML are making Pentax a little worried. I imagine threads on the PDML are b

RE: What do you all think of the micro 4/3 system?

od to know. (Hi guys!)" Pay attention, guys :-) Regards, Anthony > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Jaume Lahuerta > Sent: Tuesday, 21 October 2008 11:41 PM > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > Subject: Re: What do yo

Re: What do you all think of the micro 4/3 system?

el of maturity? ;-) - Mensaje original De: John Sessoms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Para: pdml@pdml.net Enviado: martes, 21 de octubre, 2008 13:52:32 Asunto: Re: What do you all think of the micro 4/3 system? From: "John Celio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > I imagine threads li

Re: What do you all think of the micro 4/3 system?

2008/10/20 Brian Walters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 08:34:47 +0800, "David Savage" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > said: >> Not much. >> > > I just love the way to quickly get to the essence of a topic > > :-)> :-) Cheers, Dave -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdm

Re: What do you all think of the micro 4/3 system?

From: "John Celio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I imagine threads like this on the PDML are making Pentax a little worried. I imagine threads on the PDML are barely noticeable to Pentax. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from th

  1   2   >