• 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Forums > Back > Why are MFT (m43) lenses so slow and so expensive?
popo
All-Star
*****
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,340

Reputation: 0
#16
06-29-2015, 02:38 PM
Quote:There is no argument that MFT is really unbeatable when it comes to volume/weight.

Let me rephrase that:

 

MFT is the best at MFT size/weight/performance/cost. Smile

 

I have looked at possible downsizing, and continue to do so, but for my needs MFT isn't really small enough to make a practical difference. If a DSLR is too big, MFT would still be too big. I have to keep going to the travelzoom compacts to make a worthwhile size difference for my personal needs. I'm not convinced even at bridge camera size.

<a class="bbc_url" href="http://snowporing.deviantart.com/">dA</a> Canon 7D2, 7D, 5D2, 600D, 450D, 300D IR modified, 1D, EF-S 10-18, 15-85, EF 35/2, 85/1.8, 135/2, 70-300L, 100-400L, MP-E65, Zeiss 2/50, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300/2.8, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Olympus E-P1, Panasonic 20/1.7, Sony HX9V, Fuji X100.
  Reply


Messages In This Thread
Why are MFT (m43) lenses so slow and so expensive? - by Dynszis - 06-28-2015, 01:19 PM
Why are MFT (m43) lenses so slow and so expensive? - by Dynszis - 06-28-2015, 09:24 PM
Why are MFT (m43) lenses so slow and so expensive? - by popo - 06-29-2015, 02:38 PM
Why are MFT (m43) lenses so slow and so expensive? - by Tord555 - 07-06-2015, 09:53 PM
Why are MFT (m43) lenses so slow and so expensive? - by Tord555 - 07-06-2015, 10:22 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 4 Guest(s)