[Matsu]

Yeah, but those apsc 35s are just normal primes, not wide normals.

I'm sorta intrigued by this Nikon Mirrorless announcement. There are a lot of "ifs" which we'll see answered soon enough, but it would be sort of interesting to turn my 70-200 into a 200-520 zoom - if it mounts F lenses.

Sure, I could get the same thing out of a 1.7x TC+DX body, but overall quality might not be too different, might even favor the smaller cam under certain conditions...

If it comes at a digicam price (albeit a premium digicam) say, <399 with kit lens, and is no larger than P7000, G12 etc.

If it shoots video very well, no rolling shutter for starters. One rumor suggests that there will be phase detection AF built into the sensor, which would make it unique, but is not essential to fast AF performance...

I'd consider buying one over a P&S, if

[PB PM]

Considering that the P7000 and G12 were priced at $499 and $559 Cdn on release, I doubt you'll see the Nikon ILC come in at $399. $399 was the release price of the S95 for instance! I'm guessing it will come in at a price very close to the D3100 w/kit lens, if not closer to the D5100.

[GSpotter]

Originally Posted by Matsu I think the real story is how poorly the Nikon 35 f/1.4 tested wide open. Did they have a defective copy? It's not really better than the 35 afd f/2 until stopped down. Why pay for an f/1.4 that stays parked at f/5.6?

This test compares it to the 35/2 AF-D, the Zeiss 35/2.0 ZF.2, the old AIS version and the 24-70/2.8. And Bjørn Rørslett has also a favorable review on the Nikongear forum.

[Matsu]

I'm not a big fan of his photography, though it isn't as grating as Ken Rockwell's truly horrid photos. Still, in both cases I appreciate their reviews.

Sample variation perhaps? Or different testing methodology? That review certainly shows it to be the equal or better of it's peers, but others show different.

I wonder what the mainstream photo press has to say about these lenses. I've never really looked.

[ezkcdude]

The NEX-5N has an extremely thin body with a huge grip. Interesting. I like it.

[PB PM]

Interesting design, should be better for balancing larger lenses than the current NEX cameras.

[ezkcdude]

I'm pretty sure that will be my next camera (no pun intended).

[Matsu]

I spent a bit of time looking at the usual lens reviewers. Camera Labs, Lenstip, Photozone, DXO, The Digital Picture, Bjorn, Thom, Luminous-landscape, digillyod, Pop Photo, etc... All have different styles, some more rigorous about numeric, some simply for their qualitative impressions

I'm not sure how to read it all so I look for relative comparisons. A couple of the sites give the m4/3 primes very very high lp/mm ratings - enough at their peak to equal the overall resolving power of good 35mm lenses on FX. DXO however, doesn't give that impression at all. So, who's right?

[PB PM]

Nikon announced a bunch of Coolpix, no mirrorless or DSLR. I guess the only consolation is that Canon did the same yesterday. Guess nobody wanted to compete with the new Sony cams.

[PB PM]

A nice leak of the upcoming Panasonic 14-42 M4/3s lens, which is pancake sized. If the optics are good lenses like this could improve sales of M4/3s for sure.

http://www.43rumors.com/ft5-hot-imag...-is-a-pancake/

[ezkcdude]

Originally Posted by PB PM A nice leak of the upcoming Panasonic 14-42 M4/3s lens, which is pancake sized. If the optics are good lenses like this could improve sales of M4/3s for sure. http://www.43rumors.com/ft5-hot-imag...-is-a-pancake/

So, is that a 28-84 mm equivalent focal range? If it was 24-105, it would be the perfect zoom for me, and might convince me to buy that camera.

[Matsu]

It might just be possible to make a pocketable m4/3 camera. That lens is really interesting. It's not particularly fast, but it's got a useful range, and is the first m4/3 zoom to be appreciably smaller than a DSLR kit zoom.

[PB PM]

The size is one thing, but add that to the powered zoom feature and you have something big. That could be important for people who want to shoot video, or who are used to compacts.

[Matsu]

Totally agree. These people want to loft the camera out at arms length and look through the LCD while zooming and clicking all with one hand. All power to them, may they enjoy their blurry photos. It looks like a good part of the size advantage comes from the collapsibility, which in turn necessitates a powered zoom. I wonder if the barrel extends while zooming through its focal range or if it just opens on power-up and then stays more or less the same?

[PB PM]

It is supposed to be realsed on Friday, along with a similar 45-175mm lens, so I guess we'll find out soon.

It wouldn't work for one handed arm length shooting since, you'd need one finger on the shutter and a second on the lens, since the zoom button is on it, not the cameras.

[ezkcdude]

Does anyone know if the Oly Pen E-P3 can be bought without a kit lens? It's really annoying if I'd be forced to buy a lens I will never use.

[Matsu]

Originally Posted by PB PM It wouldn't work for one handed arm length shooting since, you'd need one finger on the shutter and a second on the lens, since the zoom button is on it, not the cameras.

You're right. I wonder if future cameras will incorporate a little zoom rocker switch near the thumb or around the shutter button?

[Matsu]

Sony also launched a lot of cams.

Interesting note there. The 24MP APSC tops out at ISO 16,000 in all three new implementations. That's pretty high if it doesn't include "boost" modes. If it does, if that's 'just' the top, it might be a slight step back from the 16MP APSC. Early reports say there's heavy detail smearing in the JPEGs.

[PB PM]

Originally Posted by ezkcdude Does anyone know if the Oly Pen E-P3 can be bought without a kit lens? It's really annoying if I'd be forced to buy a lens I will never use.

There are two kit options with the E-P3, the 17mm f2.8 and 14-42mm. There is no body only option at any site or shop I've looked in. Honestly this is one of the most painful things about the M4/3s cameras, other than the E-PL1 you cannot buy them body only.

[PB PM]

Originally Posted by Matsu Sony also launched a lot of cams. Interesting note there. The 24MP APSC tops out at ISO 16,000 in all three new implementations. That's pretty high if it doesn't include "boost" modes. If it does, if that's 'just' the top, it might be a slight step back from the 16MP APSC. Early reports say there's heavy detail smearing in the JPEGs.

Yup, impressive numbers, but not much else to say about that new sensor. Throw in the fact that you lose half a stop of performance to the fixed mirror and you have more downsides than upsides IMO. The A77 is impressive in terms of specs, but it just doesn't appeal. Spec whores and tech nerds will love it, photographers, most likely not. Downsampling images to lower resolution might help in the noise department. If Nikon uses that sensor in the D300s replacement they'll likely throw in their usual magic and have better performance (by at least a stop).

[ezkcdude]

Originally Posted by PB PM There are two kit options with the E-P3, the 17mm f2.8 and 14-42mm. There is no body only option at any site or shop I've looked in. Honestly this is one of the most painful things about the M4/3s cameras, other than the E-PL1 you cannot buy them body only.

Yeah, because I'm really torn right now. I like the idea of getting the E-P3, but it's $999 with a lens I don't want. I just want the body and two of the m.zuiko lenses (12 mm and 45 mm). I guess the comparable system with the NEX-5 is the pancake 16 and the new 50 mm, but the latter is not really a true portrait lens in my opinion. But overall, it will be cheaper. I have to think about it some more.

[PB PM]

That's a high price, most shops I've seen are selling the E-P3 kits for $899. You could always buy the kit and dump the lens for $100.

[Dorian Gray]

Originally Posted by Matsu Interesting note there. The 24MP APSC tops out at ISO 16,000 in all three new implementations. That's pretty high if it doesn't include "boost" modes. If it does, if that's 'just' the top, it might be a slight step back from the 16MP APSC. Early reports say there's heavy detail smearing in the JPEGs.

Sony's JPEG engine has always been terrible. As with all brands except Canon and Nikon, we'll have to wait for raw files to have any idea what the sensor is like. I suspect it will be the best DX-sized sensor on the market, by any definition of "best" you care to choose.

[PB PM]

So now that we've seen the latest from Sony, I'm starting to think Nikon's ILC is in big trouble, even before it launches. I'm still trying to figure out what market they are targeting. No professional user is going to want to use a sensor that small, when they can get an NEX camera like the NEX 7.

Consumers in NA aren't even buying M4/3s in large numbers, so what makes Nikon think that something with a smaller sensor will sell? I think the real issue is that Nikon, and Canon for that matter, are too worried about hurting traditional DSLR sales to do anything innovative.

[ezkcdude]

Are Olympus and Panasonic M4/3 lenses interchangeable? If so, now I'm thinking I might get the Panasonic GF3 (body only) and the two new m.zuiko lenses from Olympus. I just don't know if I can wait for Sony to step up their game in the glass department.

[PB PM]

Yes, you can use any M4/3s lens on any M4/3s body. I think you'd be better off with the GF2, it has more features than the GF3, and performance is equal in terms of image quality. The GF3 might have slightly faster AF.

[ezkcdude]

It's funny. Each camera has "deal breaker" features that I'd have to get over. For Sony, it's the lack of desirable lenses (for my taste, anyway). With Panasonic, the touchscreen is apparently resistive, not capacitive, and the grip is smaller than I'd like. Meanwhile, Olympus has a relatively old sensor compared to the other two, and it doesn't have a tiltable screen. And Nikon obviously appears to have a very small sensor.

Here's the camera I want (obviously):
top of the line sensor
availability of fast wide-angle and portrait primes
tiltable OLED screen (with smudgeproofing)
big grip

It seems to me none of the ILC's have all four of these qualities right now.

[PB PM]

The Panasinic touch screens are different than say the iPhone, but after nearly two months of using the GF2 I like it. If it was like the iPhone it would be too sensitive to accidental touches. As for smudging, it does happen, but it doesn't show up when the screen is on.

[Matsu]

Curious to see samples of Sony's new 24MP APSC. FX is going to have to be something special.

NEX looks interesting too. On the one hand these systems really only need 4-5 lenses, all primes. 24, 28, 35, 50, and 85mm equivalents. Personally, I probably wouldn't carry a 28. I don't really like what it does to people up close, I'd rather have a 35 and step back. I think of a 28 as in indoor 35. 24 is a wide.

Right now Sony has a new Zeiss 24 - gives 35/36mm FOV, and a 50, gives 75, so they're starting to make some of the Primes this system needs.

[ezkcdude]

If I take two prime lenses out with me, it's almost always a 24 and 105 (35-mm equivalent). Anything in between is basically meh as far as I'm concerned. After that my favorite lens is a 300 mm, but that makes the compactness of the ILC a moot point. So I'm really only interested in those two focal lengths I mentioned. Sony has a 24 mm pancake, but they don't have anything in the 90-105 range yet. Apparently, it's on the roadmap for 2012.

What about you guys?