04-23-2018, 09:38 PM
The key question is whether they can provide consistency in production.
Their lens designs are generally fine with the usual one or two weaknesses here and there (primarily flare).
They are actually looking into AF but available parts seem to be the issue.
I reckon the more important issue is the manual aperture/electronic coupling - at least for their DSLR lenses.
In the mirrorless scope, the manual aperture doesn't matter too much - the camera will just amplify the viewfinder image according to the incoming light (which may result in a noisy image, of course) whereas in case of a DSLR the viewfinder gets just darker. That will be an issue regarding the 100mm macro I reckon.
That's all irrelevant for the 4mm Fisheye of course.
Their lens designs are generally fine with the usual one or two weaknesses here and there (primarily flare).
They are actually looking into AF but available parts seem to be the issue.
I reckon the more important issue is the manual aperture/electronic coupling - at least for their DSLR lenses.
In the mirrorless scope, the manual aperture doesn't matter too much - the camera will just amplify the viewfinder image according to the incoming light (which may result in a noisy image, of course) whereas in case of a DSLR the viewfinder gets just darker. That will be an issue regarding the 100mm macro I reckon.
That's all irrelevant for the 4mm Fisheye of course.
Chief Editor - opticallimits.com
Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji
Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji