Knorp
Well-known member
For if you wanted to use your PL 200/2.8 on your Olympus camera ...
Attachments
-
20.6 KB Views: 61
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!
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!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.Would they also fix the Dual IS issue?
Some time ago, two Olympus execs stated in an interview that technically it could be done but there was no agreement between the two companies to do so.Would they also fix the Dual IS issue?
Thanks Bart.For if you wanted to use your PL 200/2.8 on your Olympus camera ...
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."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:
Yes I saw that. I am asking about more specifics.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."
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.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.
Well Panasonic does have the 12-35/2.8 and 35-100/2.8 if you want constant apertures.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.
From Panasonic:Yes I saw that. I am asking about more specifics.
It seems at least one of them forgot to mention the details ... :banghead: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.
I'll be very interested in your findings.There is hope - will ent a G9 and try to see how I can get along with it and my Olympus PRO lenses ....
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.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.
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........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
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/ + & - .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.