TWIMC: some clarifications but stil more questions than answers.
http://www.mirrorlessons.com/2016/09/22/olympus-om-d-e-m1-mark-ii-extra-information/
2016-09-23 6:22 GMT+02:00 Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>:
> On 9/22/2016 4:52 PM, Mike Gordon via olympus wrote:
>
>> . . . The sensor is only 12+% more linear resolution than the E-M1. I
>> don't recall much trouble with moiré and false color artifacts with it nor
>> present in the Moose roll-over illustration, so perhaps little to worry
>> about.
>> Time will tell.
>>
>
> The roll-overs I posted were the 16 MP sensor. The Pen-F was of so little
> interest to me that I sort of forgot about it. However, it has a 20 MP
> sensor and no AA filter, so is probably a good surrogate for the E-M1 II.
>
> DPR has published a review, with their regular studio test shots. In this
> case, the 12% in crease in res is visible @ 100%, although I rather doubt
> anyone here will ever see a difference in any other format/medium.
>
> Pretty much the same sort of thing is true of moiré and false color
> artifacts. At 100%, there is a little more moiré, but I doubt it will ever
> be visible in normal use.
>
> I think there's indeed little or nothing to worry about in that regard.
>
> I wonder how it follows focus with video?
>>
>
> The E-M5 II hasn't impressed me in that. Ten again, I don't really know
> what I'm doing.
>
> The new Canyon certainly was impressively good in that capacity. Oly
>> seems to use the hybrid IS with the lenses responsible for some IS where
>> that is optimal.
>>
>
> This video shows how it works. <http://www.getolympus.com/us/
> en/lenses/pen-omd/fixed-focal-lengths/m-zuiko-ed-300mm-f4-0-is-pro.html>
> Pretty impressive looking, with pitch & yaw in lens and camera augmenting
> each other. 300/4 is the first lens to have it. A firmware update set the
> later OM-Ds to do the sync thing.
>
> Panny has something similar sounding with their OIS lenses on the GX8.
> Reading between the inexplicit lines, it seems that the two systems are not
> compatible. Certainly with the PLeica 100-400 on E-M5 II it's one or the
> other. OTOH, they both work very well.
>
> I wonder if the Oly 12-100 has any IS on Panny bodies?
>>
>
> I'm sure it does. That simple level seems to be compatible. It's the
> synced/cooperative systems that seem to be incompatible. At that size, it's
> the lens you hold, and holds the body. Even with a Godzilla grip on a body,
> the leverage is too great to hold the two by the body when shooting. So it
> would be the same on a teensy GM1; might look funny, but functionally fine.
>
> It does seem a bit large on the E-M5II.
>>
>
> Depends on what you compare it to. :-) <http://j.mp/2cHrYLW> I've been
> using the 100-400 regularly on an E-M6 II.
>
> More questions than answers
>>
>
> If that reverses, you're in trouble. ;-)
>
> S. I. S. Moose
> --
> What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
>
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|