[amitk26]

Originally Posted by Samurai

My lens not exactly an ultra-wide lens. The effective FL is 18-36mm. I have read multiple professional reviews on this specialist lens before I took the plunge. I believe it is my composition rather than lens distortion.

Olympus M. Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm 1:4-5.6 Lens Review: 4. Test results: Digital Photography Review

Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 9-18mm f/4-5.6 ED - Review / Test Report - Analysis

We can agree to disagree but the thing I am pointing is that the word equivelent is loaded , Equivalence is only in terms of angle of view.

Lets take the EVIL and Zuikos out of equation to make it bit more neutral.

Lets take example of Canon APS-C body and Canon 10-20mm or Sigma 10-20mm lens at 10mm , Check TSK1979's Safari PIC in Laddakh for example ( Dont have that link ready but image is there in mind). The perspective is unrealistic.

Now compare this kind of image with a 16mm on a full frame body you will notice that it looks more natural I am sure google image search and give a lot of examples. So though 10mm and 16mm are equivelent they are not same

Now same applies to those images from Zuikos.

[Samurai]

I am not saying there is absolutely no lens distortion at 9mm (EFL 18mm). But is it so high that people can't see beyond it? Besides, it totally vanishes at at higher FL.

I have peered through Rudra's 1Ds and 5D few times, so I know what you are saying. But I am no professional, I have no clients to please, I can live with a little distortion at 9mm.

When I want very wide perspective, I am willing give accept some distortion. But if you only see the distortion and not the image, then I don't know what to say. Since I have picked 9-18mm as my primary walk-around lens, I am afraid I can't do any better.

And I love shooting close-up with widest possible FL because I am trying to learn wide-angle composition. It is a difficult thing to master, hopefully someday I can get to the point where people will only see the image.

[amitk26]

Originally Posted by Samurai

I have peered through Rudra's 1Ds and 5D few times, so I know what you are saying. But I am no professional, I have no clients to please, I can live with a little distortion at 9mm.

Yeah you are right in every manner, I just took FF and APS-C as example.

Actually the point of comparison here is micro 4/3 or APS-C ( Sony NEX ,Samsung NX) , The perspective distortion is livable with 2X crop but not there at 15mm in APS-C ( Images from Canon 15-85 IS ) , I have not seen any image from Sony NEX at lower then 18 so can't comment but sensor size being same it should be similar.

But again the biggest problem with Sony is that they don't have a consortium and battery of lens manufacturers joining them, So overall Micro 4/3 wins.

Samsung NX I will leave that alone.

[Samurai]

Last saturday, I had the opportunity to check out the NEX-3 in action. The NEX-5 was in the box, so I couldn't try it.

1) The body size was smaller than PL1. But the kit lens is so long, you don't feel it is a EVIL camera. I could shoot it like a dSLR, with left hand supporting the lens from below. So it was not uncomfortable to shoot. But didn't feel compact at all, just light.

2) No in-built flash, but there is a free flash accessory that you can plug-in when required. It juts out, can't keep it on all the time.

3) The big disappoint, AF speed. The PL1 can auto-focus as fast as any dSLR. But the NEX-3 was acting more like old time P&S cameras that took their time to acquire AF.

[Samurai]

The APS-C EVIL is yet to mature, slow AF, no lens choices, etc. For that you'll have to wait at least an year.

[amitk26]

Originally Posted by Samurai

The APS-C EVIL is yet to mature, slow AF, no lens choices, etc. For that you'll have to wait at least an year.

That is no longer true Samurai about lens choice here is the roadmap of lenses.

1 2011 Roadmap of NEX
Sony NEX (E-mount) lens roadmap | Photo Rumors

2. 2011 Roadmap of Samsung NX

http://photorumors.com/2010/10/09/20...enses-roadmap/

Samsung NX already has 6 lenses in lineup. and new lens launch is in 2Q11

3. Sony shares NEX mount details free of cost with Zeiss, Cosina , Tamron and Sigma.
http://www.photoclubalpha.com/2011/0...-mount-future/
Cosina has already announced Voigatlander Nocton 35mm lens for NEX. In August 2010 Cosina launched an Adapter for Leica mount Voigatlander for NEX system but new lens will be for NEX itself.

Regards

[amitk26]

Originally Posted by amitk26

But again the biggest problem with Sony is that they don't have a consortium and battery of lens manufacturers joining them, So overall Micro 4/3 wins.

Samsung NX I will leave that alone.

Well just a few days after this post,
The announcement from Sony came as big surprise. Sony was known for proprietary standards but this time they have shared NEX mount details free of cost.

Sony give NEX mount details to Sigma, Zeiss, Cosina and Tamron | Photoclubalpha

Samsung has 6 lens now for NX system and 5 more to come this year.

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by amitk26

That is no longer true Samurai about lens choice here is the roadmap of lenses.

1 2011 Roadmap of NEX

2. 2011 Roadmap of Samsung NX

That's the 2011 road map and we are still in Feb. That is why I said wait for an year.

[amitk26]

Originally Posted by Samurai

That's the 2011 road map and we are still in Feb. That is why I said wait for an year.

No road-map apart now NX has 6 lenses already in market and Sony also has 5/6 including Zeiss ( not too sure on Sony though) so it is not that far.

These guys are moving really fast

[Samurai]

A member asked me via PM for a comparison between 4/3 and m4/3 cameras. Thought I'll post part of my reply here since it is relevant to the thread.

The trouble is, my 4/3 lenses are way too good compared to my m4/3 lenses. Therefore, apple to apple comparison is difficult.

Currently I use E-PL1 with 9-18mm lens. It is not perfect, but super convenient. It also has video unlike the E3. But the m4/3 still doesn't have a lens that matches the 12-60mm, therefore comparison is not fair.

In good light conditions, the E-PL1 + 9-18mm is 80% as good as E3 + 12-60mm, that is my gut feeling. The 9-18mm also adds some distortion due to the wide angle.

But in low light conditions, without flash, E-PL1 + 9-18mm at high ISO has disappointed me. Since I don't use flash 99% of the time, this is a problem for me. Using built-in flash with 9-18mm at wide angle is also a problem since the lens blocks a major part of the flash.

I can get usable indoor shots from E3 + 12-60mm without flash. But E-PL1 suffers noise even at ISO 400.

If you are interested in high ISO, don't look at E-PL1.

[mav2000]

Hi Samurai.

I tried both the EPL 1 and the Nex5 in store before going with the Nex 5. I spent a lot of time on making this decision and some of the guys at shops started to greet me when I walked in as I went that many times. At the end of the day, the Nex 5 just felt a lot better in the hands than the EPL 1 did. The auto focus seemed to be faster as well, specially in low light conditions. the problem with EPL 1 is there is no auto focus light, so low light seems to be an issue for people who move from point and shoots, like me. Also special modes like panaroma, 3d panaroma and HDR are extremely good and work quite well in the Nex series.

Let me add here, that the EPL 1 was the camera I was keen on in the beginning, but the deal breaker for me was the screen, as I was not going to pay another 13-15k for the VF and the slowness of the interface as a whole. Also the low light AF is very very good and high ISO, around 800-1600 snaps come out quite usable as well. I was trying this out recently at a kids birthday party, which was indoors, in the evening and used both the NEX and the EPL1. I must say that the NEX came out on top for quicker focus, specially with all the kids running around. Add to that Full HD video and it was the Nex for me. Remember I have a 3 year old kid running around all the time and I spend a lot of time taking snaps of him and HD video helps a lot as I dont need to carry a different camcorder for that anymore.

So to sumurise:

1. Full HD Video
2. Panorama
3. HDR Mode
4. Low Light capabilities
5. High ISO capabilities
6. Quick and fast AI
7. Beautiful screen - specially if you dont want to use or buy a VF


But thats just my opinion and may not suit everybody.

The main issue with the Nex series is lack of lens's and I hope this sharing of details and specs will help shore that up. I am looking for a small prime option for daily use and would make it a whole lot easier to carry around.

[Samurai]

Look at this shot taken hand held at ISO 2000 and 1/6 second.



EVIL cameras have a long way before they can come close to this. Don't think I will be discarding my E3 anytime soon. But for travel/OTR photography, the convenience of EVIL can't be overstressed.

[tsk1979]

What does your shot have to do with EVIL or no EVIL.
If you have a APS-C EVIL camera, it will do it better than a 4/3 DSLR.

[amitk26]

Originally Posted by tsk1979

What does your shot have to do with EVIL or no EVIL.
If you have a APS-C EVIL camera, it will do it better than a 4/3 DSLR.

Tanveer I think he is indicating to high ISO noise in Olympus EPL-1 Micro 4/3 and not EVIL in general.

Sony sensors for example have good high ISO performance.

On a humorous note people are still looking for good acronyms for mirror-less Since DSLR term can not be used because of lack of R in mirror-less some people say it should be just DSL ( Digital Single Lens) and some say EVIL ( Electronic Viewfinder Interchangeable lens to highlight interchangeable but at the same time EVIL is not liked by many , since retaining D for digital is still necessary I think it should prefixed by a D

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by tsk1979

What does your shot have to do with EVIL or no EVIL.
If you have a APS-C EVIL camera, it will do it better than a 4/3 DSLR.

Dream on Tanveer, it has nothing to do with the body or sensor. The E-3 and E-PL1 have the same sensor, the latter even has next generation IQ. Yet E-PL1 can't match the E-3 in low light. Check my post#174, it is the fast lens that makes the difference in low light condition. None of the EVIL families have lenses fast enough to match the dSLR families.

Originally Posted by amitk26

Tanveer I think he is indicating to high ISO noise in Olympus EPL-1 Micro 4/3 and not EVIL in general.

Sony sensors for example have good high ISO performance.

No, I do mean all EVIL cameras. There are simply no fast lenses.

Look the lenses I have for 4/3 and m4/3.

4/3 12-60mm F/2.8-4 vs m4/3 9-18mm F/4-5.6

You see the difference?