The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

AF issue: PL200/2.8 and Oly

jonoslack

Active member
Would they also fix the Dual IS issue?
Wouldn’t it be nice Peter, but I think this is unlikely - my experience is that camera makers aren’t willing to spend much money to help their customer’s to use competitors products!
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
Would they also fix the Dual IS issue?
Nifty way to get people to just invest into the 300/4... Seems like the same old shenanigans are going on in the Micro 4/3 world but the good part is that either manufacturer has a great lineup.
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
For if you wanted to use your PL 200/2.8 on your Olympus camera ...
Thanks Bart.
So what specifically is the technical problem that needs fixing? :banghead:
DFD related? I think that’s the term “Depth from Defocus” that PL uses. :facesmack:
 

SrMphoto

Well-known member
Thanks Bart.
So what specifically is the technical problem that needs fixing? :banghead:
DFD related? I think that’s the term “Depth from Defocus” that PL uses. :facesmack:
Olympus: "When using the Panasonic lens 「LEICA DG ELMARIT 200mm / F2.8 / POWER O.I.S. (H-ES200) with Olympus micro four third cameras, autofocus may not work properly."
 

SrMphoto

Well-known member
Nifty way to get people to just invest into the 300/4... Seems like the same old shenanigans are going on in the Micro 4/3 world but the good part is that either manufacturer has a great lineup.
IMO, Panasonic is missing the already semi-announced high quality "50-200mm/f2.8-4" (corresponds to Olympus 40-150/f2.8). Interestingly, Panasonic top zooms are often 2.8-4 (which I prefer because of size/weight) while Olympus has typically constant aperture f2.8 zooms. Also missing is something that corresponds to spectacular Olympus 12-100/f4.
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
IMO, Panasonic is missing the already semi-announced high quality "50-200mm/f2.8-4" (corresponds to Olympus 40-150/f2.8). Interestingly, Panasonic top zooms are often 2.8-4 (which I prefer because of size/weight) while Olympus has typically constant aperture f2.8 zooms. Also missing is something that corresponds to spectacular Olympus 12-100/f4.
Well Panasonic does have the 12-35/2.8 and 35-100/2.8 if you want constant apertures.
 

Knorp

Well-known member
Yes I saw that. I am asking about more specifics.
From Panasonic:
There are cases where auto focus does not work properly when H-ES200 is used with Micro Four Thirds cameras manufactured by Olympus Corporation.
Please refer to the announcement from Olympus Corporation for details.
It seems at least one of them forgot to mention the details ... :banghead:
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
Here a link to a test (in German) with G9 and Olympus 2.8/40-150 PRO

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jy2Oy_p1McU

Seems to work pretty well and that guy also states he likes the performance of this lens on the G9 and he had previously used it on a Olympus EM1.2

AF - also AFC obviously worked satisfyingly good and fast.

There is hope - will rent a G9 and try to see how I can get along with it and my Olympus PRO lenses ....
 
Last edited:

jonoslack

Active member
IMO, Panasonic is missing the already semi-announced high quality "50-200mm/f2.8-4" (corresponds to Olympus 40-150/f2.8). Interestingly, Panasonic top zooms are often 2.8-4 (which I prefer because of size/weight) while Olympus has typically constant aperture f2.8 zooms. Also missing is something that corresponds to spectacular Olympus 12-100/f4.
This is an interesting point, and one which really does point towards Leica involvement in the design of the PanaLeica zooms. I had an interesting discussion with Peter Karbe at Leica about variable aperture zooms several years ago. He pointed out that to make a constant aperture zoom you HAD TO throw away speed at the wide end, and that this seemed unnecessary to him. What he said was that where most manufacturers only used this option to make cheap kit lenses, he thought it was good to do the same thing with high quality zooms as well (why keep to a constant f4 when you can go from f2.8 to f4?). The SL zooms all use this principle . . . the TL zooms all use this principle . . and so do the PanaLeica zooms.

I must say, my 'inadvertent' cross over from Olympus to Panasonic over the last 6 months has me missing the 12-100 f4 . . on the other hand the PL 12-60 f2.8/f4 is much smaller and lighter and still gives me more length than the 12-40 Olympus. Still, I'm already saving up for the 50-200 Pl - it sounds like a great companion to the 12-60.

All the best
 

Elderly

Well-known member
.......to make a constant aperture zoom you HAD TO throw away speed at the wide end, ..........

I must say, my 'inadvertent' cross over from Olympus to Panasonic over the last 6 months has me missing the 12-100 f4 . . on the other hand the PL 12-60 f2.8/f4 is much smaller and lighter and still gives me more length than the 12-40 Olympus. Still, I'm already saving up for the 50-200 Pl - it sounds like a great companion to the 12-60.

All the best
and for my use f2.8 would be particularly useful at the wide end, as that is the end I would be using primarily indoors with available light only.

I'm saving up for the PL 12-60, the PL 50-200, and a G9 to put them on :grin: ..... but with caveats about the weight and size of the 50-200.

BUT ....... I do really like the 12-100 f4 as an OUTDOOR travel companion.
 

drofnad

Member
This is an interesting point, and one which really does point towards Leica involvement in the design of the PanaLeica zooms. ... to make a constant aperture zoom you HAD TO throw away speed at the wide end, and that this seemed unnecessary to him.
... . and so do the PanaLeica zooms.
I recall thinking this about Nikon's one-time kit 18-70/3.5-4.5 --i.e., not a constant 4.0 but close, w/ + & - .
Panasonic also did wonderfully at having a steady, gradual narrowing of aperture in their compact LX3/5/7 series (also 100?), going from 2.0 .. 2.8 in the LX3, then with longer range (24-60=>90eq) in the LX5 it was 2.0 .. 3.3, and then even holding that extended range for the LX7 they gained a full stop (1.4->2.3) ! Whereas an LX3/5 competitor Canon S90... had yes f/2 but only wide and then rather abruptly got narrowed. Alas, though, also the LX10.

-d.
 
Top