on 14.06.04 13:33, Frantisek Vlcek at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Interesting lenses. But one has to note that the DOF of 150/2 is still > that of a 150mm f/2 lens, and the lack of good noise at higher > iso means that it is just the same. At least I think so. Yes and no :-) COC (circle of confusion) is much smaller than in 35mm or APS, so at the same distance to subject (focus point) DOF will be much smaller in case of 4/3 than on 35mm or APS format. However to achieve the same framing you have to increase your distance to subject and resulting effect is that 150/2 on 4/3 would have greater DOF than the same lens on 35mm or APS :-)
> I don't see > the advantage here. Faster lenses are offset by smaller sensor's lack > of noise. Nobody might have 300/2 but everybody has 200/2 which is the > same size and does the same. And even your bread-and-butter 2.8 70-210 > zoom is equal to 300/2.8 on APS format, the difference between 2.8 and > 2 of olympus is equal to the difference between usable iso 1600 and > usable iso 800 on the oly. So everything is similar. No advantage? I agree here, althought 4/3 lenses (longer ones) still seems to me smaller than equivalent 35mm or APS ones :-) And at least E-1 body doesn't have problems with rain and with dust on sensor :-) -- Best Regards Sylwek
