Thanks Moose - I'm sure that as several years have passed the lenses have
got better (even if software correction is needed for some distortions) so
I suspect that what were reasonable Nikon lenses in 2004 are probably
surpassed by cheap-and-cheerful 2017 lenses.
cheers
Jez
On 1 July 2017 at 19:50, Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 7/1/2017 10:57 AM, Chris Trask wrote:
>
>> Amazon uk has a package of the Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark II body with 14-42
>>> and 40-150 mm lenses. I'm sure these are not top-notch lenses
>>> (apologies I
>>> haven't followed the intricate discussions of all their pros and cons
>>> over
>>> recent months/years!) Do you think they're 'adequate'?
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance for your suggestions,
>>>
>>> My first E-500 came with those lenses.
>>
>
>
> No, it did not.
>
> It may have come with lenses of the same focal length ranges, but Jez is
> referring to newer, smaller, lighter - and optically better, lenses for
> µ4/3 mount.
>
> Correct Able 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/
|