HSM writes:
<<I was reminded of Vert & Tokey as I juggled lenses. They would be dizzy,
likely need therapy, with the rate at which things change these days.
<<Oly 12-50 out as primary lens on an E-M5 II, Oly 12-100 in. Too big, too
heavy, better focal range, as good as most of the primes, corners amazing for a
9x zoom, still need to test C-U options. Same filter size as the PLeica
100-400, so if the Nikon 5T works . . .
<<Panny 20/1.7 out of the accessory bag, Oly 25/1.8 in. A dance continues,
after
<<a bunch of lens testing.
<<Oly 45/1.8 out of the accessory bag, Panny 42.5/1.7 in. The Panny is supposed
to be sharper, but the closer focus and IS are what tip the scales. Darned if
it doesn't look beautiful on the GM5, too. :-)
<<Oly and Panny balance maintained.
More thoughtfully adjudicated decisions based upon impeccable logic than
shenanigans, IMO. It is impressive/unsettling how quickly the "optimal kit"
can evolve these days. I think I am smitten with the Panny 42.5 for the GM-5
too. The bokeh and starbursts on the Oly
are better but the other advantages of the Panny Including IS/macro outweigh
these features. I don't know if the clearly superior starburst feature is worth
keeping the Oly for or not. I suspect the later and that the Oly will be
relinquished to a foster home at KEH. I thought you would not be able to
resist the performance and reach of the 12-100 despite the size.
My OM kit is a comforting, very enjoyable to use, well performing complement
to my other gear at least.
Watching carefully, Mike
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|