Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Why are MFT (m43) lenses so slow and so expensive?
#9
Quote:I don't think so.

Consider for instance the following kit:
  • Olympus E-M10, 396g, 11.9x8.2x4.6cm
  • Ultra wide-angle: Olympus 9-18 f4-5.6, 155g, 5.7x5cm
  • Short standard zoom: Olympus 14-42 EZ f3.5-5.6: 91g, 6.1x2.3cm
  • Tele lens: Panasonic 45-150 f/4-5.6, 200g, 6.2x7.3cm
  • Portrait lens: Olympus 45 f1.8, 116g, 5.6x4.6cm
With this kit, you're covered from 18mm (FF equivalent) up to 300mm, including a 90mm fast portrait lens.

Total weight: 958g

Carrying 2 extra batteries is pretty insignificant compared to how much one would have to carry by using another system.

 

I challenge anyone to come up with a similar kit for APS-C or FF that would come close to that weight  Wink

 

Plus, the APS-C lens selection from Canon/Nikon is rather poor, with many holes in the line up (no 20, 24, 35 and 85mm FF equiv. lenses, no 70-200 equiv., no, long zooms, etc.).

 

The only APS-C manufacturer featuring a somewhat complete lens lineup is Fuji, but the size is not even close to MFT.
 

 

Coming back to the original message - if you take similar DoF capabilities as the baseline, the MFT advantage is nil.
  


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 Klaus - 06-29-2015, 12:52 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:
1 Guest(s)