Putting aside the rather odd concept of "publishable quality" (who defines exactly what that means? It's just as arbitary as any other measure...) for a moment, my biggest issue with the most commonly-used 4/3 lenses is precisely that they AREN'T very miniaturised. It's why I applaud the new pancake lens - for me, the whole point of 4/3 should be that it treads in the footsteps of the Pen F and OM systems, and provides respectable quality in a very compact form. I think the size and weight of the long lenses is a little bit of a red herring - many press togs will tell you how much easier it is to hold a long lens. Where Oly really need to make an effort (for me, at least) is in the 21-200mm equivalent range, the area where the OM system was so very effective. It's why I personally like the 4xx series more than the 5xx - I just wish Oly would put IS into the 4xx body and improve the handling a bit and I would buy one in a flash even if it cost more than the 5xx, as it would have a real benefit for me. Other than size, there's frankly no compelling reason I can see to buy into 4/3 when other systems offer more quality and ability to crop for a similar size and cost. Obviously YMMV.
Previous
Index
Next
Flat
Re: Miniaturised 4/3rds lenses.
Edit
Reply
Quote
