Peter_in_PA

<p>I'm pretty sure that CA correction is in every 16MP Olympus µ43 camera. It's in the EM-5 I think. They give it a new name and a new twist in the newer cameras, but there's a lot of correction going on with Oly lenses in the EM-5</p>

<p>I got one just recently, haven't shot much with it yet. looks from the few sample images I've done to be incredibly useful for so little money and space.</p> <p>The 15mm wasn't so valuable to me, I had it for a while, but sold it (bought used so I lost nothing on the sale). The 9mm is a bigger "cap", a mm or two thicker, but is still pocketable.</p> <p>Can't wait to make some fun photos with it. </p>

<p>Eric, actually, the EM-5 DOES have a touch screen.</p> <p>You are spot on in your assessment, imho, though.</p>

<p>I compared those two. It was TOUGH. I went with the Olympus because I wanted the viewfinder and understood the menu system well. I also found that with lenses it was a little smaller, which is everything to me. In the final analysis, I bought the one that fit best in my hands, mostly, since they can all take great photos.</p> <p>One thing: Skip the EM-10 and buy a EM-5 while they're still available, with lens, for only 500 bucks. Unless you NEED Wi-fi, I think the EM-5 is a better camera. It's only cheap right now because the EM-5 MK II (over a thousand bucks) is just out.</p>

<p>It depends on how you're using your images, mostly, doesn't it. And what you're shooting. If I shot sports, I'd get the 7D II and not look back. But I don't.</p> <p>imho, if you can't get a good image out of the latest from Nikon/Canon/Panasonic/Fuji/Olympus/Pentax/Samsung, it's not the camera.</p> <p>The best crop frame camera is the one that you have with you, on a good tripod if possible, when you need it. And it follows that it's the camera you know and understand.</p> <p>For that reason, I ditched even my Nikon DX last year and went to µ43. The DX kit was too big to carry EVERYWHERE, and the µ43 is small enough to never leave home.</p> <p>Obviously, ymmv.</p>

<p>http://www.dpreview.com/articles/3858773808/panasonic-lumix-dmc-g7-offers-4k-video</p> <p>This... camera... looks... INSANE!</p> <p>The price is even more insane.</p> <p>16MP (where's the 24, though, guys...?) 4K video under 800 bucks WITH A KIT LENS!</p>

<p>It's not an "issue" for Olympus, since they've always designed their cameras and lenses so that ALL of their IS is in the CAMERA and never in the lenses.</p> <p>They have no motivation to make their cameras work with the other guys lenses. And no mandate to either. Canon or Nikon would never change their cameras to work better with Sigma lenses, would they.</p> <p>The fact is, if you leave both ON, it seems you will have problems, so don't do that!</p>

<p>No, I don't think they will. You have to manually switch it off on the lens, and at least one lens (the Panasonic 45-200) the in-lens stabilization doesn't totally shut off even if you turn it off.</p> <p>Turn off IS in the camera when you use those lenses. You can set up one of your MySets to do this if you want.</p> <p> </p>

<p>The problem with the 40, Skip, is how close it has to be to the subject when you focus at minimum. Too close to light it easily or well, in fact.</p> <p>This is why 60 or even 90 or 105 are more useful on DX, imho. For the same reason that, quite honestly, the 55mm and 60mm are very limited on FX.</p> <p>That said, for things like shooting flat art and such, the 40mm on DX or 55mm on DX/FX are wonderful.</p> <p>It entirely depends on what you're doing with it. I feel the 40mm is close to worthless actually. But ymmv, of course.</p>

<p>If you're not shooting things that are moving much, the 55mm f3.5 is SO good for this that when I left Nikon for µ43 I kept it and got an adaptor. It's really cheap and great and you probably don't need an extension tube.</p>

<p>The IS is why I went with the EM-5. I've been happy with. Both cameras have built-in correction, and I decided I'd rather have the more rugged body than the wifi.</p> <p>I'm pretty sure both will take identical pictures in real-world use. And there are some killer deals on the EM-5 last I looked, while they last. I paid more than that for USED.</p>

<p>Kenneth,<br /><br />I too would like some f4 zooms. Don't need the f2.8 ones they have now, but would like something a little better than the only kit zooms available.</p>

<p>Yes, that's a misprint. My bad. Sorry. But I can't fix it.</p> <p>btw, I'm impressed that their new µ43 zoom is actually less than the 43 zoom was in its day. </p> <p>I am hoping and praying Olympus survives their current troubles (at least in terms of their cameras) because I love this system...</p>

<p>I've never had a single issue with B&H in many many purchases, both personal and business, for over 20 years. They are probably the best online retail business I've ever dealt with. I've shopped in their store, too, and it's equally great.</p> <p>Adorama is also great, although I haven't bought from them quite as much.</p> <p>Amazon is good, but they don't always ship the same day I order.</p>

<p>I wonder if it's just the age of the sensor?<br /><br />I used a D1 plenty back in the day. Never experienced that.</p>

<p>DX is probably still the way to go for you.</p> <p>But...</p> <p>I also had the 18-200, and although it was okay on the D80, when you get to the high-MP cameras of today, it really shows its qualities (especially above about 110 or 120mm in my experience). On my D90, which was 12MP, I felt it was not good enough, whereas on my 6MP D50, it was plenty fine.</p> <p>So... if you decide that you are going to replace that lens, too, and I think you should, then if it were me, I'd get the D7100. There are serious deals out there right now. Then get a 16-85VR lens.</p> <p>That said, if you don't print above about 5 x 7 very much and don't crop in really heavy, keep the 18-200. You won't see a difference.</p>

<p>Apple iPod Touch isn't a horrible choice for this kind of thing if it's mostly or all sharing on the internet and email and stuff.</p>

<p>The official Olympus site info for the zoom.</p> <p>http://www.getolympus.com/us/en/lenses/pen-omd/m-zuiko-ed-7-14mm-f2-8-pro.html</p> <p>And for the fisheye.</p> <p>http://www.getolympus.com/us/en/lenses/pen-omd/m-zuiko-ed-8mm-f1-8-fisheye-pro.html</p>

<p>http://www.dpreview.com/articles/0769163918/olympus-expands-wide-angle-offerings-with-7-14mm-f2-8-and-8mm-f1-8-pro-lenses?utm_campaign=internal-link&utm_source=related-news&utm_medium=text&ref=related-news</p> <p>Now, once they release the 300mm f4 or f2.8 they will have quite the lens assortment!</p> <p>This one is too rich for my blood, though.</p>

<p>Fluorescent lighting does that. It is entirely evil.</p> <p>Some LED lighting can have some nasty effects, too.</p>

<p>I wonder if you need an olympus adapter to transfer the info from lens to camera?<br /><br />That's all I can think of. Hopefully somebody else can figure this out...</p>

<p>I agree, Craig.<br /><br />BUT... I find that the in-body IS on my Olympus EM-5 is JUST as useful on a standard wide-to-short-tele lens than on a tele, so I agree with Wouter about the usefulness.</p> <p>That said, if I could have either VR or a constant f2.8 but not both, I'd pick the constant f2.8 on a standard zoom myself.</p>

<p>I'd keep the Sigma and get the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 if it were me.</p> <p>I will say that when I shot Nikon I had the 11-16. I loved that lens. Wish I shot with it more.</p>

<p>Jamie, I think the Fuji is awesome, even though I chose the Olympus. In many ways, and for many people, they are better. (I don't like the Sony's form factor, but they take great pics).</p> <p>And Panasonic has done a great job with their µ43 offerings, too. That GX7 was really tempting, but I opted for an EM-5.</p> <p>And... the Samsung stuff, especially the latest... is really pretty amazing.</p> <p>For me, the biggest disappointment is that Nikon (which has been my brand of choice for most of the past 10 years) never put 2 and 2 together with mirrorless. What I really wanted was a DX sensor in a mirrorless compact that worked seamlessly with Nikon lenses... </p> <p>Bottom line... what a great array of choices we have, eh?</p>

<p>I have that v. 1 of the 20, and it's wonderful. I use it on an EM-5, and sometimes on my EPL-1, both very portable.</p> <p>It is a little noisy, and in good light, honestly, I prefer a kit zoom. I only really use the 20 for low light stuff.</p> <p>I think the 40mm equiv. f.o.v. is just about perfect for a "standard" lens, though.</p>