Join for FREE
It only takes a minute!
Zeiss - Always on the lookout for something special – Shop now

Welcome to BirdForum.
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community, dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE! You are most welcome to register for an account, which allows you to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

New camera, 150-400 and 2x TC ?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old Wednesday 1st August 2018, 04:53   #1
nikonmike
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: grimsby uk
Posts: 731
New camera, 150-400 and 2x TC ?

Could be interesting.https://www.43rumors.com/ft5-now-99-...-launch-in-q1/
__________________
Panasonic G9
100-400,12-60,60MM macro
nikonmike is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 1st August 2018, 13:56   #2
njlarsen
Opus Editor
 
njlarsen's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: St. James, Barbados
Posts: 22,178
Could be. However, the fact that Oly has patented 7 FF lenses lately indicates that it might be a completely new segment of the market they are trying to get into.

Niels
__________________
Support bird conservation in the Caribbean: BirdCaribbean

Just moved to Barbados
njlarsen is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Thursday 3rd January 2019, 20:49   #3
iveljay
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Wiltshire, England
Posts: 901
Just over 20 days to go......according to Olympus for the new OMD.
iveljay is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 3rd January 2019, 21:43   #4
Adey Baker
Member
 
Adey Baker's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Hinckley, Leics
Posts: 4,975
Quote:
Originally Posted by iveljay View Post
Just over 20 days to go......according to Olympus for the new OMD.
Indeed. 20 days and counting!
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	omd.jpg
Views:	114
Size:	73.9 KB
ID:	683846  
Adey Baker is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2005 2006 2007 2009 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Thursday 3rd January 2019, 21:59   #5
Vespobuteo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Utopia
Posts: 2,117
Could that be the new 150-400 zoom lens in the video?
It seems to focus a lot on the lens so to speak.
Or perhaps not, 50-150/2.8 probably and the first shown is the 300/4?

Here's the teaser:

https://download.aws.olympus.eu/cons...ng_soon_en.mp4

Last edited by Vespobuteo : Thursday 3rd January 2019 at 22:14.
Vespobuteo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 4th January 2019, 06:55   #6
Jim M.
Choose Civility

 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 6,898
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vespobuteo View Post
Could that be the new 150-400 zoom lens in the video?
It seems to focus a lot on the lens so to speak.
Or perhaps not, 50-150/2.8 probably and the first shown is the 300/4?
Your second guess was the conclusion on another forum, and I concur. Nikon and Canon make lenses with similar specs as the 150-400 mm F4, and they weigh over seven pounds (three kilograms)! And the Olympus 300 mm F4 weighed more than the Nikon/Canon 300 mm equivalents. My guess is Olympus is announcing a bloated lens at the same time they announce their bloated camera (i.e. E-M1X). They will both appeal to those for whom weight is not an issue. I don't think there are many of those who are fans of micro 4/3 though, so I don't really follow what Olympus is doing here.

I really like the E-M1 line of cameras before this one; they are full-featured and lighter than the Panasonic flagship models (GH-5, G9, etc.). Too bad Olympus isn't coming out with long lenses that complement that design philosophy. The PL100-400 is a great lightweight option from Panasonic, but it is a bit annoying that it doesn't have the excellent dual IS you get when you have an Olympus lens paired with an Olympus camera.
__________________
My Micro 4/3 birds, insects, & other wildlife photo gallery:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/albums

Last edited by Jim M. : Friday 4th January 2019 at 07:05.
Jim M. is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2013 2016 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Friday 4th January 2019, 09:18   #7
Vespobuteo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Utopia
Posts: 2,117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim M. View Post
Your second guess was the conclusion on another forum, and I concur. Nikon and Canon make lenses with similar specs as the 150-400 mm F4, and they weigh over seven pounds (three kilograms)! And the Olympus 300 mm F4 weighed more than the Nikon/Canon 300 mm equivalents. My guess is Olympus is announcing a bloated lens at the same time they announce their bloated camera (i.e. E-M1X). They will both appeal to those for whom weight is not an issue. I don't think there are many of those who are fans of micro 4/3 though, so I don't really follow what Olympus is doing here.

I really like the E-M1 line of cameras before this one; they are full-featured and lighter than the Panasonic flagship models (GH-5, G9, etc.). Too bad Olympus isn't coming out with long lenses that complement that design philosophy. The PL100-400 is a great lightweight option from Panasonic, but it is a bit annoying that it doesn't have the excellent dual IS you get when you have an Olympus lens paired with an Olympus camera.
Personally I thought the E-M1 II was on the smallish side with a "bigger" lens mounted and a larger/deeper grip does not have to be that much heavier, see Nikon Z7/Z6 for example.

Maybe Olympus is aiming at the pro sports shooters with less muscles? And their latest prime lenes in the PRO series are very nice glass. Any brand will have difficulties to expand their user base today but I'm pretty sure there are current Olympus users out there that will get this new camera.
Vespobuteo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 4th January 2019, 10:14   #8
Adey Baker
Member
 
Adey Baker's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Hinckley, Leics
Posts: 4,975
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vespobuteo View Post
Could that be the new 150-400 zoom lens in the video?
It seems to focus a lot on the lens so to speak.
Or perhaps not, 50-150/2.8 probably and the first shown is the 300/4?
It certainly looks like the 40-150mm F2.8, though the lenshood is not the standard issue. Could just be the photographer's own lens with a different hood (the original has come in for some criticism), or it might be a Mk II version of the lens - there were rumours of two tele-zooms being introduced and this particular optic could do with being upgraded with the dual/sync IS.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	40 150.jpg
Views:	41
Size:	172.6 KB
ID:	683860  
Adey Baker is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2005 2006 2007 2009 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Friday 4th January 2019, 11:19   #9
iveljay
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Wiltshire, England
Posts: 901
Olympus have doubtless designed it with a particular market sector in mind - priced accordingly - with a predicted sales figure that will decide if it was a success or failure.

Like most cameras it cannot do everything - I retained an E-P5 with VF4 solely for low level close up and macro work as the OM-Ds are nowhere near as useful, but grudgingly bought an E-M1 body to work alongside it for in camera focus stacking.

Probably not for me - but I have been proven wrong in the past over similar comments - when my needs changed. We shall see, (the E-3 was a colossal bloat over the E-1).
iveljay is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 5th January 2019, 08:20   #10
Vespobuteo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Utopia
Posts: 2,117
Looked a bit closer on the specs. It seems that Olympus did go for a pro-sized housing with built in vertical grip. To me it's actually a bit refreshing and I'm sure olympus pro shooters will love this.

For wildlife, the lack of long lenses is still an issue to me though. 300/4 is really not 600/4 equivalent (rather than 600/8) and something like a 400/4 would be needed for shorter DOF and more reach. TC:s does not count. A lens equivalent to 800/8 would be more similar to what you can get on APS-C or FF.
Vespobuteo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 5th January 2019, 14:29   #11
Jim M.
Choose Civility

 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 6,898
Agreed there are a small minority of Olympus users that prefer the existing E-M1 with the added grip, making it similar in size to the E-M1X. The camera might appeal to them. Though I suspect most photographers who, for whatever reason, feel the need for something bigger to grab onto simply use an APS-C or FF camera to begin with.

But I really think the main purpose of the E-M1X is to maintain the prestige of the Olympus line compared Panasonic; Olympus will have something in its lineup “above” its current models that it can argue is comparable to Panasonic's forthcoming full frame camera, but retaining the m4/3 crop factor.

The good news from my perspective is that Olympus has stated that the E-M1X is not the successor to the E-M1 mk. ii, so those who prefer the smaller form factor that is the hallmark of m4/3 are hopefully not being cast aside.
__________________
My Micro 4/3 birds, insects, & other wildlife photo gallery:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/albums
Jim M. is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2013 2016 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Saturday 5th January 2019, 20:42   #12
njlarsen
Opus Editor
 
njlarsen's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: St. James, Barbados
Posts: 22,178
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vespobuteo View Post
Looked a bit closer on the specs. It seems that Olympus did go for a pro-sized housing with built in vertical grip. To me it's actually a bit refreshing and I'm sure olympus pro shooters will love this.

For wildlife, the lack of long lenses is still an issue to me though. 300/4 is really not 600/4 equivalent (rather than 600/8) and something like a 400/4 would be needed for shorter DOF and more reach. TC:s does not count. A lens equivalent to 800/8 would be more similar to what you can get on APS-C or FF.
Your statement I highlighted is close to misleading. The 300/f4 is equivalent to a 600/4 when it comes to shutter time and iso. You are correct that it is not equivalent in DOF. However, if you are using a lens like that wide open, how often do you have too much DOF? I more often find myself looking for more DOF rather than less.

Niels
__________________
Support bird conservation in the Caribbean: BirdCaribbean

Just moved to Barbados
njlarsen is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Saturday 5th January 2019, 22:44   #13
opticoholic
Registered User
 
opticoholic's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: northern CA
Posts: 373
Quote:
Originally Posted by njlarsen View Post
Your statement I highlighted is close to misleading. The 300/f4 is equivalent to a 600/4 when it comes to shutter time and iso. You are correct that it is not equivalent in DOF. However, if you are using a lens like that wide open, how often do you have too much DOF? I more often find myself looking for more DOF rather than less.

Niels
Yup, I agree.

A lot of discussion about the E-M1x on the mu-43 forum, and more than a few grumbles from people who want more affordable and smaller bodies. Some have speculated that the larger body size was really needed in order to accomplish other goals for heat dissipation and the extra battery, etc... that makes sense to me. I won't be buying it any time soon, but like everyone I will be very interested in how much they were able to improve the AF-C/tracking performance.

Personally I would be more interested in a 500 or 600mm prime telephoto than a 150-400 zoom... I use my Oly 300mm with the 1.4X teleconverter pretty much permanently attached, so I'm already at 420. I heard a rumor that when they have the big event coming up, they might also announce development plans for more lenses, maybe even a little "road map"...

Dave

Last edited by opticoholic : Saturday 5th January 2019 at 22:55.
opticoholic is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2012 2013 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Saturday 5th January 2019, 23:26   #14
Vespobuteo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Utopia
Posts: 2,117
Quote:
Originally Posted by njlarsen View Post
Your statement I highlighted is close to misleading. The 300/f4 is equivalent to a 600/4 when it comes to shutter time and iso. You are correct that it is not equivalent in DOF. However, if you are using a lens like that wide open, how often do you have too much DOF? I more often find myself looking for more DOF rather than less.

Niels
Why would it be misleading? 1.5-2 stops (f4 vs f8) better noise performance is a fact for the best FF sensors vs MFT sensors. It might not be a big deal at ISO1600 but at ISO6400 it is. If you do action shots in sparse light like mornings/evenings that might be rather important.

https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Comp...1177_1136_1062

When it comes to DOF I would say, as short as possible. Not always, but It's nice to have the choice for subject isolation, but it depends on distance to subject of course. Closer shots might need stopping down.

The DOF-thing was misleading though! A 400/4 would not help here. The problem is that you have to back down with MFT to get the same framing as with FF and DOF will increase with distance. Instead you will need a shorter lens with a larger f-stop and a 300mm/f2 on MFT would be equivalent to the 600/4 on FF also in DOF.

http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

Last edited by Vespobuteo : Saturday 5th January 2019 at 23:28.
Vespobuteo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 5th January 2019, 23:43   #15
njlarsen
Opus Editor
 
njlarsen's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: St. James, Barbados
Posts: 22,178
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vespobuteo View Post
Why would it be misleading? 1.5-2 stops (f4 vs f8) better noise performance is a fact for the best FF sensors vs MFT sensors. It might not be a big deal at ISO1600 but at ISO6400 it is. If you do action shots in sparse light like mornings/evenings that might be rather important.

https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Comp...1177_1136_1062

When it comes to DOF I would say, as short as possible. Not always, but It's nice to have the choice for subject isolation, but it depends on distance to subject of course. Closer shots might need stopping down.

The DOF-thing was misleading though! A 400/4 would not help here. The problem is that you have to back down with MFT to get the same framing as with FF and DOF will increase with distance. Instead you will need a shorter lens with a larger f-stop and a 300mm/f2 on MFT would be equivalent to the 600/4 on FF also in DOF.

http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html
Sorry, but I cannot see sensor considerations to be relevant for a lens critique. And that is how you worded the original statement.

Niels
__________________
Support bird conservation in the Caribbean: BirdCaribbean

Just moved to Barbados
njlarsen is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Sunday 6th January 2019, 05:12   #16
Vespobuteo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Utopia
Posts: 2,117
Quote:
Originally Posted by njlarsen View Post
Sorry, but I cannot see sensor considerations to be relevant for a lens critique. And that is how you worded the original statement.

Niels
I usually mount a camera on the lens to take photos so the whole system is relevant for the result.
BTW, I didn't invent the laws of physics/optics that sets the limitations related to sensor size.

There are pros and cons with any camera system. But at least for me the 300mm/f4 lens on MFT is a bit short in many cases for bird photography. And TC:s come with downsides.

Another spanner in the works for Olympus (and the rest of the competition) is the Nikon 500mm PF that did change the market quite a bit as you get 750mm eqv. on APS-C (or 500mm on FF) and the weight is not much more (1468 g) than the Oly 300mm/4 (1270g).

Last edited by Vespobuteo : Sunday 6th January 2019 at 06:54.
Vespobuteo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 6th January 2019, 13:45   #17
opticoholic
Registered User
 
opticoholic's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: northern CA
Posts: 373
Vespobuteo:
I agree with you that 300mm is still a little shorter than desired for bird photography with mu-43, and I also agree that teleconverters are a bit of a compromise to get the longer focal length (tho I have been very pleased with the image quality from the 1.4x converter on the Oly 300... even with the teleconverter the lens can produce results as good or better than my Nikon 500 f/4 without any converter). But it would be nice to see some new longer super telephoto lenses (400mm or more) to pair with mu-43 bodies. This new large E-M1x body seems to be geared specifically toward serious sports/wildlife photographers, so it gives me some hope that maybe Olympus will announce the development of another longer prime telephoto, but we'll have to wait and see.

I agree with Niels that it is at least a little misleading to say regarding a mu-43 lens, "300/4 is really not 600/4 equivalent (rather than 600/8)." First of all, in terms of the ability to shoot at a faster shutter speed or use a lower ISO, f/4 is f/4 regardless of format. And secondly, although it is true that the depth of field is greater on mu-43 format with any given focal length, I see that as an advantage more often than a disadvantage with my bird photography. I mostly pursue smaller birds, but when I get close enough to get a really nice image, I almost never wish for less depth of field, always more. Even when I stop down 1 or 2 stops I usually do not get the entire bird in focus. Very often I get the head/eye very good, but the tail or one of the feet is blurry. Now some might say it could be desirable or artistic to have part of the bird out of focus... Ok fine, but my point is that I often don't have that choice; I'm forced to leave part of the bird out of focus. There is almost always plenty of nicely blurred background, plus it is possible to help that in post-processing. That's just my experience with smaller birds, but I really hope we don't drag on with a discussion about equivalence and so forth. Lord knows that subject has been beat to death.

Dave

Last edited by opticoholic : Sunday 6th January 2019 at 13:58.
opticoholic is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2012 2013 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Sunday 6th January 2019, 19:57   #18
HermitIbis
Registered User
 
HermitIbis's Avatar

 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Black Forest
Posts: 551
Quote:
Originally Posted by opticoholic View Post
I mostly pursue smaller birds, but when I get close enough to get a really nice image, I almost never wish for less depth of field, always more. Even when I stop down 1 or 2 stops I usually do not get the entire bird in focus.
Exactly. I've tried to shoot chiffchaffs hunting from 7-10 meter, with my 1-inch system (Nikon V2 + CX70-300 lens). At f/5.6 the DOF of 6-13 cm is so tiny that I never get the whole bird in focus. Next year I plan to use f/8.0, which offers a DOF of 9-19cm (for those distances 7-10m). However, at f/8 there is already diffraction kicking in.

The Olympus 300mm prime offers the same DOF already at f/5.6, one stop less. So I must admit I am envious.
HermitIbis is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 7th January 2019, 10:10   #19
Vespobuteo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Utopia
Posts: 2,117
According to Cambridge in Color diffraction will kick in already at f5.5 for a 1'' sensor at 15MP. For a sensor with 20 MP on MFT the limit will be f6.5 and 20MP on ASP-C will be limited at f8.0. DOF is shorter from the beginning for the larger sensors so not much difference in the end if you want to avoid diffraction. For perched birds I guess focus stacking would be an alternative. Personally I don't find short DOF a problem rather than a creative tool. If I want more DOF I use a wider lens/picture angle.

https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tu...ensor-size.htm

Concerning the equivalence issues, discussed above,
this is a pretty good resource to digest ("Equivalent Speed"):

https://www.opticallimits.com/Reviews/986-equivalence

Last edited by Vespobuteo : Monday 7th January 2019 at 12:14.
Vespobuteo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 7th January 2019, 11:13   #20
Tord
Registered User
 
Tord's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Malmö, Sweden
Posts: 2,002
What Olympus are doing with the rumoured EM1.X and lenses is making a statement that the company celebrates its 100 year anniversary, that they are committed to m4/3 and also launching a body and telephoto zooms in time for the 2020 olympics in Tokyo.

The first lens that appears in the video is the 300 F/4. The second lens is the 40-150 F/2.8 with a rubber lens hood.
__________________

My Gallery on 500px
Tord is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Monday 7th January 2019, 12:44   #21
Jim M.
Choose Civility

 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 6,898
Quote:
Originally Posted by opticoholic View Post

Personally I would be more interested in a 500 or 600mm prime telephoto than a 150-400 zoom... I use my Oly 300mm with the 1.4X teleconverter pretty much permanently attached, so I'm already at 420. I heard a rumor that when they have the big event coming up, they might also announce development plans for more lenses, maybe even a little "road map"...

Dave
As you probably know, the 150-400 is supposed to come with a built-in 1.25x switchable TC option, and Oly will also introduce a 2x TC (not sure if that will work with the 300mm prime as well). So it also comes with the promise of options for more reach. And yes, I believe they are supposed to announce two other longish lenses in development. I really prefer zooms myself because I need the flexibility to shift between different types and sizes of subjects.

I also agree with others that I view the greater depth of field offered by m4/3 lenses (versus lenses for full frame or A-PSC cameras) as an advantage, not a disadvantage, especially when it comes to shooting close subjects such as insects or plants!
__________________
My Micro 4/3 birds, insects, & other wildlife photo gallery:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/albums

Last edited by Jim M. : Monday 7th January 2019 at 13:08.
Jim M. is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2013 2016 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Monday 7th January 2019, 12:55   #22
Jim M.
Choose Civility

 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 6,898
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tord View Post
What Olympus are doing with the rumoured EM1.X and lenses is making a statement that the company celebrates its 100 year anniversary, that they are committed to m4/3 and also launching a body and telephoto zooms in time for the 2020 olympics in Tokyo.
Yes, but there was nothing that required them to launch the biggest and heaviest m4/3 camera and lens ever to celebrate that, so that's only a partial explanation for what they are doing.
__________________
My Micro 4/3 birds, insects, & other wildlife photo gallery:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/albums

Last edited by Jim M. : Monday 7th January 2019 at 13:05.
Jim M. is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2013 2016 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Monday 7th January 2019, 13:44   #23
Tord
Registered User
 
Tord's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Malmö, Sweden
Posts: 2,002
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim M. View Post
Yes, but there was nothing that required them to launch the biggest and heaviest m4/3 camera and lens ever to celebrate that, so that's only a partial explanation for what they are doing.
Hi,

I believe it's a calculated risk mitigation behind.

The 150-400 lens makes perfectly sense to have available for the Olympics.

From a size standpoint the rumoured EM1.X is somewhat bigger then the EM1.2 + battery grip.

However from a weight perspective it could be lighter as the mechanical coupling with the grip is gone. From ergonomics perspective, a bigger body/better grip when paired with a 150-400 it is not necessarily a step to the worse.

Olympus have a number of new camera/imaging technologies and features for which they need a body, and the electronics required to implement the technologies may require more space than is available with the current body. For instance fitting in additional imaging processor for improved AF, sustained heat dissipation (I am thinking of 4k 60 video, that's resource consuming), additional battery capacity required to supply video recording.

They also need time to stabilize and exploit and fine tune the technology, maybe release improvements/bug fixes/... through FW updates such as they have done with the previous EM cameras. 1 year should be enough.

Moving forward they will shrink the new technology and make it available to in a line of smaller cameras as we are more used to.
__________________

My Gallery on 500px
Tord is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Monday 7th January 2019, 14:54   #24
Vespobuteo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Utopia
Posts: 2,117
The rumors says it's an f4, Olympus 150-400mm f/4.0 PRO.
To me a 75-200/2.8 (150-400mm 35mm eqv.) hade been more realistic.

https://www.43rumors.com/ft5-new-oly...-x2-converter/

But interesting, it will be pretty big. Nikon/Canon similar lenses with bult in TC are 3kg+ in weight
and costs $10k.

A larger body to balance larger lenses makes perfectly sense with the E-M1-X.
Weight still does not have to be more than 800-900 grams and much less than other pro bodies
that are more like 1.5 kg.

Last edited by Vespobuteo : Monday 7th January 2019 at 19:59.
Vespobuteo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 7th January 2019, 15:16   #25
Jim M.
Choose Civility

 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 6,898
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vespobuteo View Post
A larger body to balance larger lenses makes perfectly sense with the E-M1-X.
I've never bought the argument that you need a larger body to "balance" a larger lens. The body is there to hold the sensor, etc., not to "balance" the lens, whatever that means. You can get perfect balance on a tripod or hand held with a large lens without having to increase the size of the body, you just adjust the position of your hands or the tripod mount.
__________________
My Micro 4/3 birds, insects, & other wildlife photo gallery:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/albums
Jim M. is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2013 2016 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Advertisement
Reply


Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Camera trap/trail camera smartlady Trail Cams - Camera Traps - CCTV Systems 3 Thursday 8th October 2015 20:56
Can camera lenses be refitted for another camera? KC Foggin Cameras And Photography 3 Tuesday 25th November 2014 02:47
EOS 20D, 8.2 Megapixel, SLR, Digital Camera (Camera Body) Bullock'sOriole Canon 10 Monday 1st May 2006 12:44
Help Needed on Camera Adapter, Camera busterbrown885 Digiscoping cameras 1 Saturday 3rd July 2004 14:18

{googleads}

Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.31789899 seconds with 38 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 12:32.