02-22-2012, 10:07 AM
[quote name='thxbb12' timestamp='1329900369' post='16015']
Yes, MFT is more mature, but what is great about the NX system is that they feature an APS-C system with lenses of comparable sizes (the pancake ones).
Plus, I don't think the NX lens selection, including the ones coming this year, is less appealing than the current MFT lineup. For instance, MFT does not have something equivalent to the 80-400 4-5.6 or the 16-80 3.5-4.5. For the rest, I find it quite a toss-up between the two while you get the benefit of DOF control with the NX system.
To me the main issue of the NX system is their sensors which are quite behind Sony in terms of noise and DR. They also don't have a replacement of the NX11 with a better EVF.
[/quote]
In µFT there are 75-300 (Olympus) and a 100-300 (Panasonic). These are, if you include the crop a match to an 80-400. You can buy both of them now. Until it reaches the shops the 80-400 is vapour ware. For a hypothetical Samsung 16-80 you have a real Olympus 12-50 which is starting to ship now. Sure the Oly is slower by it is water sealed - swings and roundabouts. As I said the 16-80 is not out. Concerning lenses for mirror less, there are many engineering issues to overcome to enable efficient AF. Until the product is out and confirmed to work satisfactory, I just refuse to count them and the flower you want to photograph has gone.
I think the biggest problem with Samsung is that they are new to the business and are still learning how to do cameras. Sony bought the old Minolta team to speed up the process. A camera is just not another computer gadget. To me, that is the biggest point in favour of Olympus, they have a lot of experience in designing cameras. If they only had a solution for the rattle-snake issues of fast Panasonic lenses.
If you have a Samsung system I hope you enjoy it. It wouldn't help me if you didn't.
Yes, MFT is more mature, but what is great about the NX system is that they feature an APS-C system with lenses of comparable sizes (the pancake ones).
Plus, I don't think the NX lens selection, including the ones coming this year, is less appealing than the current MFT lineup. For instance, MFT does not have something equivalent to the 80-400 4-5.6 or the 16-80 3.5-4.5. For the rest, I find it quite a toss-up between the two while you get the benefit of DOF control with the NX system.
To me the main issue of the NX system is their sensors which are quite behind Sony in terms of noise and DR. They also don't have a replacement of the NX11 with a better EVF.
[/quote]
In µFT there are 75-300 (Olympus) and a 100-300 (Panasonic). These are, if you include the crop a match to an 80-400. You can buy both of them now. Until it reaches the shops the 80-400 is vapour ware. For a hypothetical Samsung 16-80 you have a real Olympus 12-50 which is starting to ship now. Sure the Oly is slower by it is water sealed - swings and roundabouts. As I said the 16-80 is not out. Concerning lenses for mirror less, there are many engineering issues to overcome to enable efficient AF. Until the product is out and confirmed to work satisfactory, I just refuse to count them and the flower you want to photograph has gone.
I think the biggest problem with Samsung is that they are new to the business and are still learning how to do cameras. Sony bought the old Minolta team to speed up the process. A camera is just not another computer gadget. To me, that is the biggest point in favour of Olympus, they have a lot of experience in designing cameras. If they only had a solution for the rattle-snake issues of fast Panasonic lenses.
If you have a Samsung system I hope you enjoy it. It wouldn't help me if you didn't.
enjoy