Joel, no disagreements about the Panasonic 20/1.7 lens, if I were to
be in the market
for en E-P1/2, I'd get one in a heartbeat, an excellent lens it seems.
I was commenting
on the colours and noise of the image in the link you posted to.
Sorry if I came across as harsh. I guess I just had higher
expectations than what
Olympus did here, and not unreasonable ones, I believe, considering
their Pen and OM
systems history.
regards,
Dawid (also always a bit of a clod) Loubser
On 06 Nov 2009, at 3:49 PM, Joel Wilcox wrote:
>> I have to disagree. As an image, it's quite cure, but it's
>> technically
>> terrible.
>> It looks like a 100% crop form a small-sensor digicam to me, to be
>> honest. Sorry, for
>> ISO 400, it's really unusable, and somehow looks too "chunky."
>
> That's fine with me. I have no money on the E-P1/2 horse. The
> original question was about the lens, and the natural point of
> comparison is the Olympus 17mm pancake rather than some visionary
> ideal. The lens does very well I think. I'm afraid I don't otherwise
> look for technical prowess in Flickr images beyond fairly simple or
> obvious things. I'm a bit of a clod.
>
> Joel W.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|