Both points are senseless in my opinion. A one stop faster lens is
nothing but a click on the ISO dial these days and even there the larger
camera with larger pixels has the advantage. As to depth of field
control a 4/3 format lens needs to be 2 stops faster than a full-frame
to achieve the same shallow DOF. 1 stop doesn't do it.
So there's no reason to have the 4/3 lens and therefore no reason to
have a sliding or any sort of adapter.
Chuck Norcutt
On 7/20/2013 5:22 PM, Nathan Wajsman wrote:
> In the context of a large expensive camera. it might be reasonable to
>>have some sort of sliding adapter. In one position, you get m43, in
>>the other 4/3, and both have all the electronics they need for high
>>performance.
>>
>>They appear to have the lenses for it. Comparing Olympus vs Nikon,
>>look at pairs a pro might use -- O 14-35 F2 vs N 24-70 2.8, O 35-100
>>2.0 vs N 70-200 2.8 and O 90-250 2.8 vs N 200-400 F4 -- prices and
>>weight are generally comparable but the Oly products are all a stop
>>faster.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|