From: David J Taylor on
"Rich" <none(a)nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:pr2dnXGeIM4eDc_WnZ2dnUVZ_tNi4p2d(a)giganews.com...
[]
> I don't pretend they should have the system range of Canon and Nikon
> when
> they JUST RELEASED THE FIRST CAMERA. Besides, Olympus and Panasonic
> (4/3rds, micro 4/3rds) have 7-14mm (14-28mm equivalent on FF) lenses
> that
> are better than ANY Canon lens and most Nikon lenses. Give Samsung some
> time, if they get it right, they could have a fuller system.

I'm not sure they have a lot of time, to be honest.

When I last looked, Olympus lenses were rather expensive, and yet lacked
image stabilisation, even in the telephotos.

David

From: Bruce on
On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 22:22:27 -0600, Rich <none(a)nowhere.com> wrote:

>Besides, Olympus and Panasonic
>(4/3rds, micro 4/3rds) have 7-14mm (14-28mm equivalent on FF) lenses that
>are better than ANY Canon lens and most Nikon lenses.


Better, eh?

On what basis are they "better"?

From: Chris Malcolm on
In rec.photo.digital David J Taylor <david-taylor(a)blueyonder.delete-this-bit.and-this-part.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
> "Rich" <none(a)nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:pr2dnXGeIM4eDc_WnZ2dnUVZ_tNi4p2d(a)giganews.com...
> []
>> I don't pretend they should have the system range of Canon and Nikon
>> when
>> they JUST RELEASED THE FIRST CAMERA. Besides, Olympus and Panasonic
>> (4/3rds, micro 4/3rds) have 7-14mm (14-28mm equivalent on FF) lenses
>> that
>> are better than ANY Canon lens and most Nikon lenses. Give Samsung some
>> time, if they get it right, they could have a fuller system.

> I'm not sure they have a lot of time, to be honest.

> When I last looked, Olympus lenses were rather expensive, and yet lacked
> image stabilisation, even in the telephotos.

Olympus do the image stabilisation in the camera, not the lens.

--
Chris Malcolm
From: Peter Huebner on
In article <eVA4n.27388$Ym4.3975(a)text.news.virginmedia.com>, david-
taylor(a)blueyonder.delete-this-bit.and-this-part.co.uk.invalid says...
>
> When I last looked, Olympus lenses were rather expensive, and yet lacked
> image stabilisation, even in the telephotos.
>
> David
>

I don't know a lot about different Oly dslr models, but the E-620 has
sensor shift IS. I understand sensor-shift is not as effective as lens
based, but on the other hand it makes for lighter lenses and allows you
to achieve IS with adapter mounted lenses ... (point of special interest
to me).

-P.

From: Gary Eickmeier on

"Peter Huebner" <no.one(a)this.address> wrote in message
news:MPG.25bdec1a7febdf709898f8(a)news.individual.net...
> In article <eVA4n.27388$Ym4.3975(a)text.news.virginmedia.com>, david-
> taylor(a)blueyonder.delete-this-bit.and-this-part.co.uk.invalid says...
>>
>> When I last looked, Olympus lenses were rather expensive, and yet lacked
>> image stabilisation, even in the telephotos.
>>
>> David
>>
>
> I don't know a lot about different Oly dslr models, but the E-620 has
> sensor shift IS. I understand sensor-shift is not as effective as lens
> based, but on the other hand it makes for lighter lenses and allows you
> to achieve IS with adapter mounted lenses ... (point of special interest
> to me).

The Sony A550 has it all. It is a DSLR with fast focusing live view,
rotating LCD, sensor stabilization, HDR, and 14MP.

Gary Eickmeier


First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Prev: Flying with cameras
Next: Nikon D3000 and a teleconverter