09-19-2016, 08:51 PM
(This post was last modified: 09-19-2016, 08:55 PM by Brightcolours.)
$1200 for the 25mm f1.2.
$1300 for the 12-100mm f4...
$300 for the 30mm f3.5 macro.
It is a 1.25x macro lens, not 2.5x magnification (which would be impossible for a 30mm lens). 1.25x is reached at 14mm distance to the subject with the front of the lens.
Ah, so they cheated again with the mag factor
With the small sensor they have the bragging rights for bigger magnification ON PRINT. But they chose to brag the incorrect way. That is the marketing people for you.
The 12-100mm f4 zoom lens focusses much closer at 12mm than at 100mm. Interesting but it can be a bit of a bother (I get the same thing when using my 70-200mm with extension tube).
Olympus puts this 24-200mm f8 FF equivalent lens next to a FF 24-70 f4 + 70-200mm f4 combination. A bit silly.
It is more comparable to the likes of Canon EF-M 18-150mm f3.5-6.3 IS STM which is a 14-120mm f2.8-5 MFT equivalent.
The specs show quite a lot of focal length shortening towards minimum focus distance with only 0.21x at 0.45m MFD. A nice lens (focal range and sharpness), shame about the small aperture and high price.
The 30mm macro appears to be a very nice little lens, but no mention of any light accessories to help with illumination with the extremely short subject distance to the front of the lens.