02-07-2012, 04:13 AM
At that focal length the depth of field is already so small, and on full frame I personally feel it is too shallow. Considering this, a low light capable f-stop that gives more depth of field when decently telephoto might be easier to work with than a 200mm f/2 on ff. Maybe this is Olympus's response to complaints that m4/3 is not good at sports photography.
Just quickly looking at a dof calculator, the 4/3 sensor would have 2.5 ft. of in focus, while a ff 200 f/2 like BrightColours has said, would have only 0.8 when focused at 20ft. Seems if the AF is super fast, and Olympus always boasts this, it could be used at this application.
Just a thought, really trying here to justify it... I wouldn't ever buy it though.
Just quickly looking at a dof calculator, the 4/3 sensor would have 2.5 ft. of in focus, while a ff 200 f/2 like BrightColours has said, would have only 0.8 when focused at 20ft. Seems if the AF is super fast, and Olympus always boasts this, it could be used at this application.
Just a thought, really trying here to justify it... I wouldn't ever buy it though.