I pains me as well, Dawid. I enjoy using my E-3 and 12-60 and 50-200;
my E-420 is pretty good, although I don't use the 25/2.8 much, just
the 14-42; but my next camera will probably be a Panasonic.
And it won't be the GF-1 since it lacks IS in the body. I rather
fancy the LX3, although the external viewfinder looks rather over-
priced; it has quality of design combined with quality of image on its
side, along with rather a decent focal length at the wide end.
None of the Olympus compacts, from the E-P1 down, excites me to
anything like the same degree.
Chris
On 28 Sep 2009, at 10:12, Dawid Loubser wrote:
> Anyway, I really am not convinced, the 17mm is a poor excuse of a
> lens, based on
> the results I have seen. Even more embarrassing that the Panasonic
> 20/1.7 is *so*
> much better... And it's not even done with Leica.
>
> I know I am hammering on about this, but it pains me so... This should
> have been Zuiko's
> finest hour, finally on a platform with no mechanical constraints.
> Instead, they produced
> probably the poorest prime lens I have ever seen.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|