snubbr.com

Best brand lenses??
If you were going to invest in a digital slr system for various uses including portrait and wedding and event photography........

Which brand would you purchase based on quality of available lenses??.

Which brand would you purchase if you also factored in quality of flash??.

I have posted a couple of weeks ago and have been considering the nikon d300 but have not yet made up my mind..

Thanks for your opinions...

Comments (30)

I would and did purchase the "Brand" lenses for the digital camera I own. I have a Canon 5D and only own Canon Lenses..

Stevehttp://vette74.smugmug.com..

Comment #1

What's the best brand of anything? Cars, trucks, frying pans, television sets....

There's no answer to your question, and if you want to buy a D300, go ahead. They are good cameras..

BAK..

Comment #2

Do you really think that your demands for lenses would tax any of Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Sony, or Olympus?.

They all make great lenses; they all make poor lenses; generally price is a decent indicator of quality for all of them..

If you want the Nikon, get it. I doubt you will ever require a lens so specialized that you can't find one for your Nikon body..

Nothing is enough for the man to whom nothing is enough...

Comment #3

GraciesMom wrote:.

If you were going to invest in a digital slr system for various usesincluding portrait and wedding and event photography........

Which brand would you purchase based on quality of available lenses??.

Which brand would you purchase if you also factored in quality offlash??.

I have posted a couple of weeks ago and have been considering thenikon d300 but have not yet made up my mind..

Thanks for your opinions..

Well Madam lets kit you out..

Ok so you want the D300. excellent choice! with grip and battery shall we say US $2000..

Now lenses85 1.4 $100070-200 2.8 vr $200024-70 2.8..$200014-24 2.8 $170050 1.4 $300add a wide prime of your choiceand for bigger events a 300 2.8vr $4500plush flash and bag.

Shall we say $14000...will that be cash or charge?.

Seriously, all makers will have lense to use for what you want. All companies make good lenses...at a price...as well as dogs..and some make some pleasant suprises..

The D300 really would be a great choice though those lenses well you pay for what you get...there are other lesser lenses that will be optically as good or almost so. If you are not shooting sport and want to go Nikon, you may be able to save money on the camera and get a lesser Nikon...or a Fuji S5 or S3..

There are pros using Canon, Nikon ...even Sony, Pentax and Oly getting great results...Pentax have some great short primes, Oly have the ONLY f2 zooms, Sony have probably the best 85 1.4 af lens..

I would not buy other than Nikon or Canon if you want long pro tele lenses...if shooting shorter and not sports, then take your pick..

Try what you can get a hold of and go from there..

Neil..

Comment #4

Aletheia wrote:.

Do you really think that your demands for lenses would tax any ofCanon, Nikon, Pentax, Sony, or Olympus?.

They all make great lenses; they all make poor lenses;.

Hi,.

What's the poor dSLR lens that Olympus make?.

Regards, David..

Comment #5

David Hughes wrote:.

Aletheia wrote:.

Do you really think that your demands for lenses would tax any ofCanon, Nikon, Pentax, Sony, or Olympus?.

They all make great lenses; they all make poor lenses;.

Hi,.

What's the poor dSLR lens that Olympus make?.

Regards, David.

Thats kind of the biggest drawback when buying olympus.All so called "branded"lenses are good and olympus doesn't stand out much of the crowed unless we are talking about how expensive accessories are!I love olympus but those prices are just crazy,and they don't deliver for what they ask...

Comment #6

Go ahead and get the D300. I don't think you'll be sorry..

For fear of being called a fan-boy, I think that Nikon makes the best quality lenses when considering consumer and pro glass. There aren't many stinkers in the Nkon line-up..

Olympus also makes superb lenses, just not nearly enough of them, and I don't like the smallish 4/3 sensor. Just my opinion..

With Nkon or Canon, you can always rent lenses when you want to try one out or need one for a specific occasion. I've never seen any other brand for rent..

Nkon's iTTL Creative Lighting System is arguably the best there is. The D300 has built in commander mode for controlling several off camera flashes...

Comment #7

Thats kind of the biggest drawback when buying olympus.All so called"branded"lenses are good and olympus doesn't stand out much of thecrowed unless we are talking about how expensive accessories are!Ilove olympus but those prices are just crazy,and they don't deliverfor what they ask..

That could not be a more ignorant statement..

Zuiko 50mm f2 <$400 and one of the sharpest lenses EVER.

Edge to edge sharpness doesn't deliver...please. their kit lenses outperform some of the upgrade canon/nikon lenses..

On the whole are they cheap, no, do you get amazing value and optics for the money you spend, every time. read the reviews....

There's no reason to think you can't find what you need in Oly/sigma/leica lens lineup either. you just may end up shooting a zoom instead of a prime in some instances and that might not be the end of the world. you can even go legacy glass and get the benefit of IS with the e3/e510, try that with canon/nikon...

Comment #8

David Hughes wrote:.

What's the poor dSLR lens that Olympus make?.

Here's a start:.

18-180mm: A badge-engineered Sigma 18-200mm. You could protest that Sigma makes it, but it is labeled Olympus. If Olympus didn't want to be associated with this lens, they had the option of letting Sigma release this with the Sigma brand name. Not a great lens on any mount. Doesn't help that 18-180mm is a bit of a weird range for a DSLR superzoom, as it starts at 36mm (35mm equivalent). Digicam superzooms start there, not DSLR..

70-300mm: Another badge-engineered Sigma, this time the 70-300mm APO. Not a terrible lens considering the price, at least on other mounts. It's a $200 lens which sells in Olympus mount for $400..

50-200mm: Slow AF, vignetting at longer focal lengths. Hopefully the SWD version is better, as it's got a better focus motor and the optics in the focusing group have been redesigned..

14-54mm: Overall a good lens, but not very sharp. Decent considering the price. Not terribly surprising that it's being replaced by a totally different lens..

150mm: Great lens, but not at this price! Canon 135mm f/2 is also a great lens at 40% of the price. If a Canon EOS to 4/3rds adapter were made....

Seen in a fortune cookie:Fear is the darkroom where negatives are developed..

Comment #9

Freealfas wrote:.

Thats kind of the biggest drawback when buying olympus.All so called"branded"lenses are good and olympus doesn't stand out much of thecrowed unless we are talking about how expensive accessories are!Ilove olympus but those prices are just crazy,and they don't deliverfor what they ask..

That could not be a more ignorant statement..

Zuiko 50mm f2 <$400 and one of the sharpest lenses EVER.

Edge to edge sharpness doesn't deliver...please. their kit lensesoutperform some of the upgrade canon/nikon lenses..

On the whole are they cheap, no, do you get amazing value and opticsfor the money you spend, every time. read the reviews....

There's no reason to think you can't find what you need inOly/sigma/leica lens lineup either. you just may end up shooting azoom instead of a prime in some instances and that might not be theend of the world. you can even go legacy glass and get the benefitof IS with the e3/e510, try that with canon/nikon..

Read my statement again....go check the prices versus quality and then come back and enlight us.They just can't justify that price tag I didn't say that they are better or worse than the competition I only said that they are 50% more expensive.If I had a never ending reservoir of money I would buy only olympus... but...its not the case for most of us.And btw I own an E-510...

Comment #10

Nickleback wrote:.

David Hughes wrote:.

What's the poor dSLR lens that Olympus make?.

Here's a start:.

18-180mm: A badge-engineered Sigma 18-200mm. You could protest thatSigma makes it, but it is labeled Olympus. If Olympus didn't want tobe associated with this lens, they had the option of letting Sigmarelease this with the Sigma brand name. Not a great lens on anymount. Doesn't help that 18-180mm is a bit of a weird range for aDSLR superzoom, as it starts at 36mm (35mm equivalent). Digicamsuperzooms start there, not DSLR..

70-300mm: Another badge-engineered Sigma, this time the 70-300mm APO.Not a terrible lens considering the price, at least on other mounts.It's a $200 lens which sells in Olympus mount for $400..

50-200mm: Slow AF, vignetting at longer focal lengths. Hopefully theSWD version is better, as it's got a better focus motor and theoptics in the focusing group have been redesigned..

14-54mm: Overall a good lens, but not very sharp. Decent consideringthe price. Not terribly surprising that it's being replaced by atotally different lens..

150mm: Great lens, but not at this price! Canon 135mm f/2 is also agreat lens at 40% of the price. If a Canon EOS to 4/3rds adapterwere made....

You may want to re-evaluate your opinions a bit at the very least.

18-180 - forgettable, no argument.

70-300 - badge engineered or not, a very good lens for the money that gets you effective focal length of 140-600, find comparable for similar money and performance..

50-200 - exceptionable, read the testing -.

Http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/38/cat/15.

14-54 - excellent, sharp, read yet again how well it performs.

Http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/33/cat/15.

150 - $2200 @ amazon. compare it fairly to a 300 f2.8 canon as that's as fast as you are going to get and then look at the $4k+ price tag and then tell me how your math works out for almost a whole stop less of performance... or the 200mm f2 that isn't out yet to get close to the EFL of the 150mm, not the 135mm as you are apples to oranges with that..

Http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/39/cat/14.

So out of that you were reasonably accurate on ONE account, the first.....

Comment #11

You said and I quote,.

"they don't deliver for what they ask".

I'd argue that is a patently false statement, their optic's are exceptional and can go toe to toe with anything canon/nikon put out... starting with their kit lenses which no one else has matched yet..

Their high grade compares to L series and pro matches at the very least and more often exceeds. you simply get what you pay for. compare effective focal length lenses to each other for performance optically and stop wise and Zuiko's are right there for cost and performance..

Yes you pay a bit more, I don't have the endless reservoir either but shopping used helped me manage some of the costs..

Regardless of whatever cash you do have, to say they don't deliver is what I took/take issue with...

Comment #12

Freealfas wrote:.

18-180 - forgettable, no argument.

Hey, at least you agree with me on one thing..

70-300 - badge engineered or not, a very good lens for the money thatgets you effective focal length of 140-600, find comparable forsimilar money and performance..

It's a $200 lens on any other mount. OK for $200, lousy for $400. No other way around that. Sigma could put out a $200 version for 4/3rds, but they are likely contractually bound not to..

50-200 - exceptionable, read the testing -.

Http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/38/cat/15.

Contradicts other testing and user experience. If this lens is so great, why would they waste the development effort to redesign the optics when converting to SWD?.

14-54 - excellent, sharp, read yet again how well it performs.

Http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/33/cat/15.

What is "blur index"? How about MTF? Even this site mentions softness at 54mm wide open. And again, if this lens is so great, why waste the development effort?.

I'd be careful trusting reviews form this site. They don't seem to be too critical. Of the Canon 17-85, they write:.

"good to very good sharpness across the frame, and across the entire focal length range".

"In the lab we do record CA when this lens is set to it's widest angle, but even here the effect is not incredibly significant".

"Distortion is handled excellently with this lens.".

Http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/136/cat/11.

This lens is known to have poor corner sharpness, tons of barrel distortion and lots of CA at wide angle. See here for a better review:.

Http://www.photozone.de/...s-17-85mm-f4-56-usm-is-test-reportreview?start=1.

Note the "new record" for barrel distortion. A record that was later broken by the Nikon 18-200mm. Of the Nikon lens, slrgear says "somewhat high geometric distortion across a range of focal lengths". Perhaps they like understatement?.

150 - $2200 @ amazon. compare it fairly to a 300 f2.8 canon asthat's as fast as you are going to get and then look at the $4k+price tag and then tell me how your math works out for almost a wholestop less of performance... or the 200mm f2 that isn't out yet to getclose to the EFL of the 150mm, not the 135mm as you are apples tooranges with that..

Take the 135mm f/2 at $900, have somebody make a mount conversion for $100 (Sigma could do it, they know both protocols, but are likely contractually forbidden from doing this). Compare that to $2200 150/2. Ouch..

And if you want to compare 35mm to 4/3rds and use "equivalent" focal length, it's only fair to use "equivalent" aperture as well. Compare $2200 150/2 to $1200 300/4 IS..

If comparing 4/3rds to APS-C the difference is even more stark. 150/2 at $2200 vs 200/2.8 at $700..

So out of that you were reasonably accurate on ONE account, the first....

I think you should take off your blinders..

Seen in a fortune cookie:Fear is the darkroom where negatives are developed..

Comment #13

Nickleback wrote:.

50-200 - exceptionable, read the testing -.

Http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/38/cat/15.

Contradicts other testing and user experience. If this lens is sogreat, why would they waste the development effort to redesign theoptics when converting to SWD?.

They redesigned it to accept the swd system, the optics were/are just fine as has been noted. prove something other than you opinion to the contrary.

14-54 - excellent, sharp, read yet again how well it performs.

Http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/33/cat/15.

What is "blur index"? How about MTF? Even this site mentionssoftness at 54mm wide open. And again, if this lens is so great, whywaste the development effort?.

They redesigned the walkaround lens to make it a little longer and wider and add swd, seems like a good use of efforts and resources. @$960 it's a little dear, the 14-54 @ < $400 offers sealed, sharp and great edge to edge... where's the problem..

150 - $2200 @ amazon. compare it fairly to a 300 f2.8 canon asthat's as fast as you are going to get and then look at the $4k+price tag and then tell me how your math works out for almost a wholestop less of performance... or the 200mm f2 that isn't out yet to getclose to the EFL of the 150mm, not the 135mm as you are apples tooranges with that..

Take the 135mm f/2 at $900, have somebody make a mount conversion for$100 (Sigma could do it, they know both protocols, but are likelycontractually forbidden from doing this). Compare that to $2200150/2. Ouch..

There's simply no reason to make any adapter's thank you, you are simply comparing apples to oranges for no good reason, these are 2 different lenses regardless of you stomping your feet to think otherwise..

And if you want to compare 35mm to 4/3rds and use "equivalent" focallength, it's only fair to use "equivalent" aperture as well. Compare$2200 150/2 to $1200 300/4 IS..

What's the point of not comparing equivalents?.

Here's where you fall on you face, f2 in 4/3rds is f2 in aps-c is f2 in 35mm sensor, there's no equivalency factor to equate them on this, an f stop is an f stop plain and simple. So my comparison was as close to apples to apples as Canon gets for 35mm format as canon doesn't offer a 300mm f2 lens for 35mm sensor... to be fair. and on that I still come out financially significantly better.

If comparing 4/3rds to APS-C the difference is even more stark.150/2 at $2200 vs 200/2.8 at $700..

What don't you get, f2 vs. f2.8, try comparing the Canon EF 200mm f/2L IS USM @ $6k and tell me how the 150 f2 doesn't come out ahead on price and performance..

Why do you insist on trying to illustrate an inaccurate point with comparisons that aren't fairly weighted?.

300mm f2.8(7.2 lbs) - let's throw in the 300mm f2.8 for kicks and tell me where Canon's 600mm f 2.8 lens is on the map...hmmmm.... waiting.... I know that answer, It's not. that would be unequalled..

It does have the 400mm f2.8(11.8lbs) but at $6k again is still more expensive than the Oly but I guess you want to pay for the extra 4.6lbs you'll be hauling around..

7-14mm - tell me where canon's answer to that one is as well...that's right you only go to 16-35, you do get the nod for apeture though...just not as wide or sharp..

I think you should take off your blinders..

I think you need to address your bias...that, and learn a bit about light gathering among the different formats and the quality that the Zuikos offer..

Tell me why 5d/mkIII shooter's are looking for the MF zuiko's for studio shooting...spend a little time at fred miaranda and ask them...

Comment #14

Freealfas wrote:.

Nickleback wrote:.

What's the point of not comparing equivalents?here's where you fall on you face, f2 in 4/3rds is f2 in aps-c is f2in 35mm sensor, there's no equivalency factor to equate them on this,an f stop is an f stop plain and simple. So my comparison was asclose to apples to apples as Canon gets for 35mm format as canondoesn't offer a 300mm f2 lens for 35mm sensor... to be fair. and onthat I still come out financially significantly better.

If comparing 4/3rds to APS-C the difference is even more stark.150/2 at $2200 vs 200/2.8 at $700..

What don't you get, f2 vs. f2.8, try comparing the Canon EF 200mmf/2L IS USM @ $6k and tell me how the 150 f2 doesn't come out aheadon price and performance..

Why do you insist on trying to illustrate an inaccurate point withcomparisons that aren't fairly weighted?.

300mm f2.8(7.2 lbs) - let's throw in the 300mm f2.8 for kicks andtell me where Canon's 600mm f 2.8 lens is on the map...hmmmm....waiting.... I know that answer, It's not. that would be unequalled..

It does have the 400mm f2.8(11.8lbs) but at $6k again is still moreexpensive than the Oly but I guess you want to pay for the extra4.6lbs you'll be hauling around..

7-14mm - tell me where canon's answer to that one is as well...that'sright you only go to 16-35, you do get the nod for apeturethough...just not as wide or sharp..

I think you should take off your blinders..

I think you need to address your bias...that, and learn a bit aboutlight gathering among the different formats and the quality that theZuikos offer..

Tell me why 5d/mkIII shooter's are looking for the MF zuiko's forstudio shooting...spend a little time at fred miaranda and ask them..

I agree with some of what you say, but a 50mm lens is still a 50mm lens even if it's Oly...its NOT a 100mm lens. Take a 14mp aps camera and crop a photo to 4/3 7mp camera size and you also get a photo with the the 35mm fov of a longer lens still..

Yes Oly has some nice f2 lenses (that are expensive) they will not give the same dof as on larger sensors...but yes they ARE f2 with f2 shutter speeds if ysed at that aperture....Oly do not make anything new faster than that though (there are one or two from other manufacturers though)..

Neil..

Comment #15

Hi,.

I'm sorry I asked now..

But I feel that Olympus make good "kit" lenses and enough of them. Look here for the current range: http://www.four-thirds.org/en/products/lense.html.

It doesn't include the Leica one with the "FourThirds" mount for the Digilux 3 btw..

For the record I own a lot of cameras by Nikon, Canon, Leica, Pentax and one or two by Olympus (and several no one has heard of from - for example - Alfred Gauthier). I have worn out one of the Olympus cameras and broken a Canon and Nikon camera. I don't collect the things but I dislike throwing things away when they still work. Also I happen to like using basic, primitive, film cameras (luckily the lenses are pretty good). It's a sort of work out for the grey matter..

Regards, David..

Comment #16

Olympus:12-60SWD...superb reach/IQ and speed!20-200SWD...superb reach / IQ and speed!.

With these 2 lenses only, I cover 24-400 mm (film)...and that for a very reasonable price (even compared to the Pro Nikors...and you have to compare to these because IQ is on same level)..

One of the reasons I choose for Olympus instead of Nikon (and I've used several Nikons with high IQ glass in the past)!..

Comment #17

GraciesMom wrote:.

If you were going to invest in a digital slr system for various usesincluding portrait and wedding and event photography........

Which brand would you purchase based on quality of available lenses??.

Which brand would you purchase if you also factored in quality offlash??.

I have posted a couple of weeks ago and have been considering thenikon d300 but have not yet made up my mind..

Thanks for your opinions..

Well, folks, I guess the OP understands now just how difficult this question is to answer. It always ends up with a bunch of measurebaters arguing over esoteric subtleties that actually have nothing to do with the original question, for which there is no good answer..

Thank you for your help.Nothing is enough for the man to whom nothing is enough...

Comment #18

Freealfas wrote:.

Nickleback wrote:they redesigned it to accept the swd system, the optics were/are justfine as has been noted. prove something other than you opinion tothe contrary.

You don't need to redesign optics to add SWD. The size of the focusing group on the new SWD vs the old lens is no different, but the optical formula is different..

They redesigned the walkaround lens to make it a little longer andwider and add swd.

I don't doubt the longer/wider, I doubt the SWD explanation..

150 - $2200 @ amazon. compare it fairly to a 300 f2.8 canon asthat's as fast as you are going to get and then look at the $4k+price tag and then tell me how your math works out for almost a wholestop less of performance... or the 200mm f2 that isn't out yet to getclose to the EFL of the 150mm, not the 135mm as you are apples tooranges with that..

Take the 135mm f/2 at $900, have somebody make a mount conversion for$100 (Sigma could do it, they know both protocols, but are likelycontractually forbidden from doing this). Compare that to $2200150/2. Ouch..

There's simply no reason to make any adapter's thank you.

Sure there is. Price. Performance of these two lenses are similar. Olympus simply has no competition for this lens for their mount, and sets an unreasonably high price. Same thing with the 70-200mm..

You are simply comparing apples to oranges for no good reason.

You are afraid of the comparison?.

These are 2 different lenses.

Really? No sh!t, Sherlock. However they are very close in focal length and performance, and the max aperture is the same. You use the same argument further down. I'll tell you when I get to it..

And if you want to compare 35mm to 4/3rds and use "equivalent" focallength, it's only fair to use "equivalent" aperture as well. Compare$2200 150/2 to $1200 300/4 IS..

What's the point of not comparing equivalents?.

I am comparing equivalents. You are not. 150mm f/2 on 4/3rds is equivalent to 300mm f/4 on 35mm..

An f stop is an f stop plain and simple..

Two can play this game. A focal length is a focal length, plain and simple..

I think you need to address your bias...that, and learn a bit aboutlight gathering among the different formats and the quality that theZuikos offer..

I don't doubt that Olympus makes many fine lenses. As does Nikon, Canon, Pentax, Sony, Sigma, Tamron, Cosina, etc. And like all of these, Olympus makes some stinkers..

Tell me why 5d/mkIII shooter's are looking for the MF zuiko's forstudio shooting...spend a little time at fred miaranda and ask them..

Because Olympus makes some fine lenses, and some stinkers. 5D shooters are using some fine OM lenses. Hey look, folks using an adapter to use a lens from a different system! No different that what I mentioned above, using a Canon 135/2 (if only an adapter were available) instead of the incredibly overpriced Olympus 150/2..

And if you'd really like to go down this path, tell me why Olympus abandoned these fine OM lenses (and some equally fine OM cameras) when going digital?.

Seen in a fortune cookie:Fear is the darkroom where negatives are developed..

Comment #19

David Hughes wrote:.

I'm sorry I asked now..

That's OK, I knew any answer would unleash vitriol from Olympus fanboys..

But I feel that Olympus make good "kit" lenses.

I don't disagree. So does Pentax, BTW..

Seen in a fortune cookie:Fear is the darkroom where negatives are developed..

Comment #20

Aletheia wrote:.

Well, folks, I guess the OP understands now just how difficult thisquestion is to answer..

Yep. The answer is pick your system. The most important part of a camera is the nut behind the viewfinder..

Seen in a fortune cookie:Fear is the darkroom where negatives are developed..

Comment #21

To the OP - this has more than de-evolved as has been noted which wasn't the intent....

Not once have I said they are the best lenses but they are more than a match for anything when comparing apple to apples with like effective focal length and aperture from canon and nikon plain and simple..

I was reacting to the statement that Oly lenses don't deliver. As I contend that's a patently false statement..

Nickelback - you rattled off a number of lenses that you think don't deliver, I suspect with nothing representing personal experience with any of them, correct me if I'm wrong. your statements are simply not true..

The fact of the matter is Oly lenses are respected and do deliver from kit lenses all the way through the line save the agreed to 18-180mm..

There is no reason not to consider Olympus if you find the lenses you need and there are a lot of benefits to doing so, IS, dust reduction, pixel mapping, reduced lens weight....

And as for Oly abandoning their lenses, how do you figure when I can get an adapter to use any of them... that's not abandoning anything..

The mount is different as they were the first to design both body and lens for digital photography...

Comment #22

If you want the 4/3 system and are happy with 2X crop factor then Olympus makes sense.Personally I went for Canon but I could just as easily have bought Nikon.The D300 is a brilliant camera and the current market leader in it's sector.Go ahead and get it and the Nikon lenses to go with it.It will serve you fabulously well.In 6 months time Canon or Pentax or maybe even Nikon will bring out a new market leader.You go with what feels right at the timeas someone posted earlier they all make good cameras and they have all got enough glass for most of us.PJT..

Comment #23

Freealfas wrote:.

I was reacting to the statement that Oly lenses don't deliver. As Icontend that's a patently false statement..

You misread, obviously. I never said Oly lenses don't deliver. Some most certainly do. I simply pointed out some that do not..

And as for Oly abandoning their lenses, how do you figure when I canget an adapter to use any of them....

Sure, through an adapter, without meter coupling. So can any Canon user, as you pointed out. It's no longer a native mount..

You can't use a 50mm OM in the same way that you did on OM..

The mount is different as they were the first to design both body andlens for digital photography..

There's no reason to change the mount to do this..

Seen in a fortune cookie:Fear is the darkroom where negatives are developed..

Comment #24

You misread, obviously. I never said Oly lenses don't deliver. Somemost certainly do. I simply pointed out some that do not..

I was referring to the other poster that did and didn't mean to imply you had said that if I did. I still contend your list save the 18-180 is very inaccurate for the points I mentioned. You have admitted no experience with them and you opinions fly in the face of more regarded opinion out there, it just doesn't hold any water..

And as for Oly abandoning their lenses, how do you figure when I canget an adapter to use any of them....

Sure, through an adapter, without meter coupling. So can any Canonuser, as you pointed out. It's no longer a native mount..

Oly never had a range of AF lenses to bring to their digital cameras hence there was no compelling reason to maintain that mounting system if they could clean sheet design a mount/body/lens system to take advantage of the 4/3 size sensor allowing smaller/lighter lenses to be manufactured of comparable effective focal lengths relative to the 35mm standard..

Add an adapter and you still can use whatever lens Zuiko made as well as literally hundreds of others, they are just going to be MF that's all..

You can't use a 50mm OM in the same way that you did on OM..

The mount is different as they were the first to design both body andlens for digital photography..

There's no reason to change the mount to do this..

Smaller & lighter lenses is a reason to do this...

Comment #25

Freealfas wrote:.

Oly never had a range of AF lenses to bring to their digital cameras.

Which doesn't preclude using OM for digital. Nikon F and Pentax K both support MF lenses..

Hence there was no compelling reason to maintain that mounting system.

Good lenses?.

The real "no compelling reason" is that Olympus by-and-large abandoned OM by the mid '90s..

If they could clean sheet design a mount/body/lens system to takeadvantage of the 4/3 size sensor allowing smaller/lighter lenses tobe manufactured of comparable effective focal lengths relative to the35mm standard..

You could do the same with OM mount as Canon did with EF-S. Use the old mount, but have new lenses that can extend further into the body to take advantage of the shorter backfocus allowed with the smaller mirror and sensor..

And even with the "clean sheet" design Olympus didn't take full advantage of the shorter backfocus, because they needed to leave room for the sideway swinging mirror of the 300 series..

Add an adapter and you still can use whatever lens Zuiko made as wellas literally hundreds of others, they are just going to be MF that'sall..

Not to mention not meter coupled..

There's no reason to change the mount to do this..

Smaller & lighter lenses is a reason to do this..

A short backfocus OM lens on OM mount would be as light and small as an E-series lens..

Seen in a fortune cookie:Fear is the darkroom where negatives are developed..

Comment #26

Thanks for all the feed-back and discussion..

Finally! I have made up my mind. I have a d300 on the way and will take a look at the following lenses as possibles..

Nikon - 17-55 f2 (I think)nikon 85mm f1.4nikon 50 mm f1.4tokina 12-24sigma 30 mm f1.4nikon 70 - 300.

I am considering some combination of these lense but will take a look at all of them except the tokina today since this is not avail in Canada..

If I purchase the 85mm and either the 50 or 30 mm then I will probably get the tokina 12-24..

If I purchase the nikon 17-55 f2 then there will be no fixed lenses or anything wider to start off with..

Any comments about this lineup?..

Comment #27

GraciesMom wrote:.

Thanks for all the feed-back and discussion..

Finally! I have made up my mind. I have a d300 on the way and willtake a look at the following lenses as possibles..

Nikon - 17-55 f2 (I think).

I think it would be 2.8 Oly make the only f2 zooms at the moment...unless this is very new..

Nikon 85mm f1.4nikon 50 mm f1.4tokina 12-24sigma 30 mm f1.4nikon 70 - 300.

I am considering some combination of these lense but will take a lookat all of them except the tokina today since this is not avail inCanada..

If I purchase the 85mm and either the 50 or 30 mm then I willprobably get the tokina 12-24..

If I purchase the nikon 17-55 f2 then there will be no fixed lensesor anything wider to start off with..

Any comments about this lineup?.

Very nice. You could consider the 85 1.8 over the 1.4 and for a little more get the zoom as well. Discliamer not a Nikon camera user...though I am starting to collect some Nikon lenses to use on my Pentax cameras..

Neil..

Comment #28

From 200mm on down, I would say Pentax is best overall...

Comment #29

GraciesMom wrote:.

If you were going to invest in a digital slr system for various usesincluding portrait and wedding and event photography........

Which brand would you purchase based on quality of available lenses??.

Which brand would you purchase if you also factored in quality offlash??.

I have posted a couple of weeks ago and have been considering thenikon d300 but have not yet made up my mind..

Thanks for your opinions..

All major brands offer great lenses. Canon and Nikon just offer way more of them..

Nikon's flash system is unequaled. Canon offers full-frame at a moderate price with the 5D. For weddings, the flash is a lot more important..

The D200 was pretty much the standard for wedding work. Unless Canon updates the 5D soon, the D300 will continue to dominate...

Comment #30

Click Here to View All...

Sponsored Amazon Deals:

1. Get big savings on Amazon warehouse deals.
2. Save up to 70% on Amazon Products.


This question was taken from a support group/message board and re-posted here so others can learn from it.

 

Categories: Home | Diet & Weight Management | Vitamins & Supplements | Herbs & Cleansing |

Sexual Health | Medifast Support | Nutrisystem Support | Medifast Questions |

Web Hosting | Web Hosts | Website Hosting | Hosting |

Web Hosting | GoDaddy | Digital Cameras | Best WebHosts |

Web Hosting FAQ | Web Hosts FAQ | Hosting FAQ | Hosting Group |

Hosting Questions | Camera Tips | Best Cameras To Buy | Best Cameras This Year |

Camera Q-A | Digital Cameras Q-A | Camera Forum | Nov 2010 - Cameras |

Oct 2010 - Cameras | Oct 2010 - DSLRs | Oct 2010 - Camera Tips | Sep 2010 - Cameras |

Sep 2010 - DSLRS | Sep 2010 - Camera Tips | Aug 2010 - Cameras | Aug 2010 - DSLR Tips |

Aug 2010 - Camera Tips | July 2010 - Cameras | July 2010 - Nikon Cameras | July 2010 - Canon Cameras |

July 2010 - Pentax Cameras | Medifast Recipes | Medifast Recipes Tips | Medifast Recipes Strategies |

Medifast Recipes Experiences | Medifast Recipes Group | Medifast Recipes Forum | Medifast Support Strategies |

Medifast Support Experiences |

 

(C) Copyright 2010 All rights reserved.