Panasonic interview: “we are developing lenses for sport photographers”
There is a new Panasonic interview at Imaging Resource (Click here) with Mr Darin Pepple, senior marketing manager at Panasonic. There is a lot of talk about WiFi and mobile integration but also some talk about MFT. Here are some highlights:
1) Mr. Pepple says that “we’re seeing a lot of professional photographers who are in the wedding and event fields making the transition to video. In fact, in an upcoming trade event, you will see us present several photographers who are showcasing their ideas on how a traditional photographer can make use of video as part of their workflow.”
2) Interesting: The GH2 and a lot of the hacks that you saw coming into the GH2 inspired Panasonic to do more.
3) Panasonic clearly underlines the advantages of contrast af that is far more reliable and accurate than phase detection AF. And Panasonic says that on sensor Phase detection is “really more of just a software trick.”
4) About the development of a new bigger sensor mirrorless system he answers: “I don’t think we’re going to do that.”
5) And finally a real new “rumor”. Mr. Pepple says that “a 300mm f/2.8 or even a 600mm f/2.8 would be a great thing to have. We don’t have that yet. So, at f/2.8 we go to up to about 100mm and that’s the limit for us. We’ve got some development to do in the optics to make the sports photographers interested.”
6) There are also some interesting considerations about how to market Panasonic mirrorless cameras. They are no more trying to advertise the general “mirrorless” concept, they are now more and more focusing on advertisign the top features of the camera. That’s the right approach I think.
It’s a really interesting interview I invite you to read in full at Imaging Resource!
DonTom
5 months ago |I’m glad they realise the need for lenses for sports photographers, and the need for PDAF. The PDAF has to come first, no point in developing hugely expensive glass for CDAF, who the hell in their right mind would buy it?
beautemps
5 months ago |A line ist a numer of dots.
PDAF is drawing a line, CDAF ist making the dots.
As soon as making the dots gets faster than drawing a line, the one technologie has overcome the other.
We are just at this point. And CDAF is going to use prediction of vector movement on Sensor (Hybrid AF).
Nikon made it very impressiv. Sony did it, not so good. Samsung just made a new NX300 with hybrid AF. And for sure, i believe the next PEN will have hybrid AF. And Pana ist still looking how to do it…as they just said in the interview…
J Shin
5 months ago |> make the sports photographers interested
Won’t sports photographers want phase-detection AF?
Nico Foto
5 months ago |Given what FUJI has done with the x100s, where they merged PDAF and CDAF effectively to get an outstandingly fast AF, i believe its only a matter of time before we see something like that in the m43 camp. It makes total sense, you get the best of both worlds: fast AF, accurate AF, tracking, and last (BUT NOT LEAST) AF in low contrast or low light situations. AND, as a byproduct, legacy four thirds lenses would work as they are without the need of complex adapter solutions like the Sony translucent mirror. Hell yeah, it makes total sense to have both AF methods available.
I’m looking forward to that, and I could even bet that in one year at most we will have that.
Steve
5 months ago |“Given what FUJI has done with the x100s, where they merged PDAF and CDAF effectively to get an outstandingly fast AF”
We have very limited hands on info about this. Sony said the same thing about their hybrid AF and the end results were less than advertised.
Nico Foto
5 months ago |You are absolutely right regarding real world performance. But, this is just the tip of the iceberg. Its only a matter of time before manufacturers get hybrid af right. That is my guess, and I would bet on it
Anonymous
5 months ago |Fuji? Fast autofocus?
Their much improved AF is still well behind m4/3.
I own an X100, btw.
Nico Foto
5 months ago |The key is the “s”. X100S -> see the “S” after 100? Its the 2013 version of the camera, just unveiled last week I believe. Check it out. Blazing fast AF with hybrid CDAF and PDAF.
FACEMAN
5 months ago |It’s important to remember that this is just the tip of the iceberg.
MANFACE
5 months ago |JUUUST THE TIP!
Anonymous
5 months ago |I know about the x100s, thank you very much. Still, its Fuji, and their marketing claim of blazingly fast super new autofocus makes me at best smile and at worst cry.
MarcoSartoriPhoto
5 months ago |Well, Fuji claims its new x100s has the fastest AF of all fixed lenses cameras (x100 and leicax2, I can’t think of any other, please help me). I’ve seen only a couple of videos on youtube and what I’ve seen was not astonishing. Maybe I’m too well used to my omd… I’m keeping an eye on x100s though, but for other reasons.
YouDidntDidYou
5 months ago |Contrast AF is way more accurate as long as you got reasonable contrast in you focus area then its difficult not to get focus, if I’m on the ball I usually get a 98-99% success rate where my other shooters get about 80%
If Panny and Oly are working on tracking by colour and tracking by recognised faces which will be useful for sport and wedding photographers, maybe even track by animal species…
Good news on Panasonic’s future marketing plans….
fhjutyri
5 months ago |@youdidnt
“Contrast AF is way more accurate as long as you got reasonable contrast in you focus area then its difficult not to get focus, if I’m on the ball I usually get a 98-99% success rate where my other shooters get about 80%”
BS the problem is you think everything is in focus , we have all seen your ideas of what is sharp.Here is a top tip if your “other shooters” are real as opposed to in your head , get them to do all the photos for your images suck bigtime , or you could just try and learn composition, exposure and focus
Now,just in case you guys think I am being mean to this dick here are some of the shots that he thinks are good.You limeys must be real easy to please or he pays you to let him take the photos .
A hellish attempt to disguise a terribly exposed image
http://www.flickr.com/photos/youdidntdidyou/8254059547/in/photostream
More of the same
http://www.flickr.com/photos/youdidntdidyou/8244260680/in/photostream
cant even focus on a static subject
http://www.flickr.com/photos/youdidntdidyou/8227305194/in/photostream/lightbox/
more focus woes
http://www.flickr.com/photos/youdidntdidyou/8248747347/sizes/o/in/photostream/
Here he has it labeled motion blur pity the static subjects are all soft too
http://www.flickr.com/photos/youdidntdidyou/8198966987/in/photostream/lightbox/
as a final tribute he even manages to get images from a fisheye soft
http://www.flickr.com/photos/youdidntdidyou/8179133133/sizes/o/in/photostream/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/youdidntdidyou/
YouDidntDidYou
5 months ago |@fhjutyri
perhaps you can show us how you do it or PERHAPS NOT.
it’s hard to believe that you are employed as a biology teacher on the east coast of the USA, it’s even harder to believe that you are actually married.
Dummy00001
5 months ago |> A hellish attempt to disguise a terribly exposed image
> Here he has it labeled motion blur pity the static subjects are all soft too
Chill out. Most of the stuff, though might be not technically perfect, still is almost perfect at capturing the mood of the moment. I had to look at the photos twice before spotting the imperfections. That tells something.
Otherwise, I advise you to check the EXIF first. Most of the shots you linked, have few parameters at their limits. IOW, under the circumstances, one is lucky to have a usable shot at all. Regardless of the gear.
Petertdunn
5 months ago |Posting links to others work anonymously is not at all cool.But to be fair the linked gallery is filled with badly composed,poorly exposed snapshots.Remember he is charging customers for this.All I can say is I hope his prices are low and that his customers never look at anyone else,s work.
As to lucky shot a paid professional should be equipped for the job and not hoping for luck. There is no doubt FF shooters who make up the bulk of pro wedding shooters have an advanatge at high ISO ,though I have seen some excellent wedding work done from mFT users so this is no excuse. Weddings are pre arranged events at a known location there is no excuse for using gear not suitable for the job. Though by the dozens of examples on the gallery the lack of skills of the photographer/s is the real issue
YouDidntDidYou
5 months ago |@Petertdunn, @fhjutyri and @freddie
three identities… your intelligence knows no bounds.
“Posting links to others work anonymously is not at all cool” say he who does post links himself.
YouDidntDidYou
5 months ago |@fhjutyri
OK let me talk through the images 1-6
1. I told the wedding couple before I took the shot just beforehand that I was going to be a silhouette shot and metered and composed accordingly, I’m also well able to use HSS flash when I want to.
2. I used 3 different flash settings (slow synch etc) for the 1st dance proofing about 30 photos, also I used 3 different lenses, this was the only silhouette first dance shot and the wedding couple have already told me they love it. btw the bride’s sister has just booked her wedding with me.
3. The wedding couple are in focus, I don’t extra sharpen my images for flickr, I sharpen if required for print.
4. already ordered and printed for the couple and it looks beautiful (see info at image regarding sharpening for flickr)
5. shutter priority 1/8 second, so you think I should of used a faster shutter speed to make the other subjects sharper DOH!!!!! the motion blur affect would of gone!
6. ah yes I should of used a tripod that was 9 foot in the air instead of shooting at arms length this spontaneous image taken in lower light in humid (see image 2 along where groom writing in condensation on window)conditions. The blur on the right hand side is a mixture of out of focus and motion blur (because I pressed the shutter down as the camera was still moving).
PERHAPS ONE DAY YOU MIGHT LEARN HOW TO USE THE FLICKR COMMENTING SYSTEM instead of feeding me SEO juice.
Fredddie
5 months ago |Save the excuses the guy could have picked anyone of hundreds of images they are at best snapshots and honestly that is being kind.Perhaps if you kept your pie hole shut and just counted the cash you have creamed off the unlucky saps it would be ignored but no you try and worm and weasel your way around what to anyone who can see are blatantly bad examples of the photographic class. Then have the brass neck to try and tell others how to do it,Jesus what a joker
YouDidntDidYou
5 months ago |@fhjutyri and @freddie
two identities… your intelligence knows no bounds.
The Other Chris
5 months ago |I’m sorry, but based on those images I agree with the previous commenters. Do you have an example of #4 after sharpening? I looks like the reflection is more in focus than the bride herself, and even then there looks to be motion blur that wouldn’t be correctable in post.
lalayn
5 months ago |I am sorry “youdidn’t “but these are very poor images , and I would be unhappy with them if they were my shots. You seem to be making excuses and accusations about users with other IDs posting multiple times . There is no excuse for such poor images especially when you are a professional. Focus accuracy, decent exposure and composition are the very least one should expect from a paid professional. I am not your biology teaching nemesis. Perhaps if you looked at the images more critically instead of making up excuses for them, things would improve.
lalayn
5 months ago |I am sorry “youdidn’t “but these are very poor images , and I would be unhappy with them if they were my shots. You seem to be making excuses and accusations about users with other IDs posting multiple times . There is no excuse for such poor images especially when you are a professional. Focus accuracy, decent exposure and composition are the very least one should expect from a paid professional. I am not your biology teaching nemesis. Perhaps if you looked at the images more critically instead of making up excuses for them, things would improve.
The Other Chris
5 months ago |I’m sorry, but based on those images I agree with the previous commenters. Do you have an example of #4 after sharpening? The reflection seems to be more in focus than the bride herself, and even then there looks to be motion blur that would not be correctable in post.
YouDidntDidYou
5 months ago |@The Other Chris
1, One commenter 3 identities (the commenter changes his ID frequently on 43rumors on a daily basis).
2. The image has already been printed and looks fine 8by10, how would you like it sharpened for print/web/retina display?
3. I can assure the bride is sharper than her reflection.
4. Motion blur is somewhat correctable in post google “blurity software” or the forthcoming photoshop CS7
The Other Chris
5 months ago |I assure you I’m not one of the “identities” of the previous poster(s). I’ve posted on this site before, and I’ve never attacked you or your work in my previous postings.
I also downloaded the photo from Flickr and tried to sharpen it myself to no avail. The bride’s hand in the reflection sharpened up a bit, but I couldn’t get the bride sharp without it looking oversharpened. I realize it’s not a full size image, and Flickr automatically sharpens images upon uploading, so maybe I’m doing it wrong. Again, I was just agreeing with the previous poster about this one particular set of images (and not even all of them, I like the 1st dance silhouette myself).
Also, just to clarify that I’m not one of the previous commenters, I live in the Midwest and am not a biology teacher (yet). Here’s a link to my website, just in case you want to openly attack my images (hey, it’s only fair): http://christophercraddock.tumblr.com
Sum
5 months ago |Yeap, CDAF is more flexible and accurate but most DSLR people don’t think so even they are constantly bothered by the focusing calibration.
Anonymoose
5 months ago |CDAF is software, PDAF is hardware.
PDAF-on-sensor is 100% accurate, on top of being faster than CDAF.
Juraj
5 months ago |+1
NtT
5 months ago |so what about point 3 from the interview:
“And Panasonic says that on sensor Phase detection is “really more of just a software trick.””
I’m a bit confused now…
nobody
5 months ago |Translation: Panasonic does not yet have the on sensor phase detect AF technology.
Esa Tuunanen
5 months ago |That’s bullshit to hide that they don’t have phase detection involving hybrid AF.
lnqo-M
5 months ago |I think Panasonic will use the sam patent for PDAF så Olympus have, by difference micro lens on green pixel.
Pavlo
5 months ago |Absolutly different experience here. I found Nikon D3000 in dim light quite unreliable. May be more expensive models perform better.
fhjutyri
5 months ago |who would have thought a four year old low end { lowest you get in fact } would not have superior AF lol
Pavlo
5 months ago |One can compare to the lowest gf or e-pl of the era. So why are you loughing?
GM
5 months ago |PDAF can be made in hardware using sensor. just move sensor to and from lens at 60 times per second and check how contrast changes(change of contrast is measured now – that way CDAF works). It is easier for Olympus since it moves sensor anyway – stabilization, just one more move needs to be added – on lens axis. Current rates of CDAF are 120 measures per second. PDAF in above method could work in 30fps movie: 1 frame – movie, 2f – focus check, 3f – focus check, 4f – proper focus.
Esa Tuunanen
5 months ago |Phase detection works by comparing two simultaneous data sets.
And it’s made by sensor (be it main or dedicated focus sensor like in SLR) seeing two images, essentially looking images formed by opposite sides of lens.
Trying to throw sensor out of lens mount doesn’t achieving anything else than that already present in CDAF.
GM
5 months ago |Yes it would be CDAF in reality, but, because you do not need to move lens(only sensor at 60Hz) it can be perceived as PDAF – lens, like in PDAF, moves to focus point and then stops, currently in CDAF it has to move, and then turn back to focus point.
NFT
5 months ago |what is true or panny was lied ?
Dummy00001
5 months ago |The only camera which officially supports that is the Nikon 1. And even then, we have only Nikon’s word for it, as it is technically impossible to tell how much of a difference the on-sensor-PDAF makes. Because CDAF is that fast this days. User reports about Nikon 1 + F-mount adapter + F-mount lens weren’t particularly encouraging: only AF-S, only single (center) point AF, continuous AF/tracking is not supported, no face detection.
Otherwise, all other cameras which have tried to advertise on-sensor-PDAF were pretty gimmicky at AF. Consider the most recent Canon’s EOS M: biggest feature is the hybrid AF, biggest weakness – slow AF. Go figure.
Esa Tuunanen
5 months ago |Were you expecting Canon to admit that they’re stuck in film era legacy system and that EOS-M is just ment to attract people blinded by Canon’s name?
Already Chipwork’s tear down of 650D (with same sensor) and comparing sensor’s surface to Nikon 1 would have told that Canon’s integrated phase detection is very incapable to doing much anything.
Nikon 1′s sensor again has clear focus point rows of phase detecting pixels (like in SLR PDAF sensor) so it’s no wonder that it can actually track moving target unlike CDAF based focusing.
http://www.sansmirror.com/newsviews/galapagos-focus-testing.html
Of course SLR’s PDAF is surely lot more mature tech so already that explains partially why it still doesn’t work so great with Nikon’s SLR lenses.
Unless focus can be moved and sampled at so high speed that target really doesn’t move much any between consecutive samplings CDAF stays as crapshoot for moving targets.
JTwIlson
5 months ago |I am a mFT Oly OMD and NIkon FF D4 /D800 user and I have used the NIkon V1 with a couple of my NIkon lenses ( 70-200 and 300mm F2.8 ) and while it does not allow tracking ( I would have been shocked if it did) the results were excellent. Using its limited selection of native lenses the results are far better than I have found on the OMD. Considering that Nikon, Sony already have a working option it can only be a matter of time till it becomes a standard feature across all mirrorless formats. I suspect we will see a truly working system if/when NIkon or Canon come out with a proper mirrorless system
Martin
5 months ago |PDAF will never be 100% accurate, neither on dedicated PDAF sensors nor when integrated into the imaging sensor. PDAF on imaging sensor can resolve the problem of imperect alignment of imaging sensor and PDAF sensor, but neither tolerances in the focus drive of the lens nor the alias problem intrinsic to PDAF: The (well-known to anybody actually using PDAF) problem is with regular structures, like parallel lines, which do match in an out-of-focus position just as well as they do in-focus. Hybrid AF could in principle resolve this issue by applying both techniques in conjunction, but given that CAF now essentially is as fast as PDAF, it needs really clever ideas to render such a sequentialization of first PDAF, then CAF competitive with respect to focusing speed. I guess for the time being, only mild hybrid AF, which selects either PDAF or CAF depending on situation (which is what the Nikon 1 does as far as I understand), is a viable option.
Boooo!
5 months ago |Cookies gone AGAIN?
Anyway, no. Accuracy is not only a function of the PDAF mechanism, but also of the lens. A theoretical sensor with a fully functioning PDAF would indeed be 100% accurate by itself, but the lens might very well not be, and only the end result is what matters.
That being said, CDAF alone quite likely isn’t the future. PDAF for “almost accurate” instant positioning, coupled with some very lightweight CDAF movement, should do the trick. I’m not sure if any of the existing lenses could do both, since the fundamental principles in mechanically driving the lens focus element(s) are different.
Anonymous
5 months ago |Yup, PDAF is hardware, CDAF is software.
Which is why PDAF is likely to disappear altogether. Adding hardware to a product makes it more expensive. On the other side, software improves automatically as hardware gets faster.
hsalonen
5 months ago |“So, at f/2.8 we go to up to about 100mm and that’s the limit for us. ”
Whatever happened to 150mm/2.8 that was announced in Photokina?
admin
5 months ago |He forgot the lens
Dunne
5 months ago |I think he was talking about the diameter of the front element.
The Real Stig
5 months ago |+1
lnqo-M
5 months ago |Yes, i too.
Bob B
5 months ago |That is very odd?
http://www.43rumors.com/new-42-5mm-f1-2-and-150mm-f2-8-lenses-coming-2014-full-olympuspanasonic-preorder-list/
Anonymous
5 months ago |Lets not forget that the 150mm f/2.8 is coming out in 2014 and I bet it will be priced ridiculously.
habits
5 months ago |cool can I buy the 150mm ? just maybe he was talking about available options
david_papp
5 months ago |I can’t see sport photographers jumping on the MFT bandwagon, until the implementation a reliable continuous AF system based on phase detection.
YouDidntDidYou
5 months ago |@david_papp
sports photographers won’t care whether continuous autofocus is caf or pdaf as long as it’s reliable.
spam
5 months ago |+1
Esa Tuunanen
5 months ago |Admin, commenting seems to be breaking apart.
Just like one poster said in that Metabones MFT adapter-page news page might come with some posters name+email prefilled and after correcting those and making reply reloaded page came with another users name prefilled and moderation waiting comment of that user visible.
And main 43rumors page shows news with more comments made than visible when opening page of that news.
Also refresh/reload of page can still show comment being made minute ago even though it was already visible ten minutes earlier.
Pavlo
5 months ago |I confirm the issue
kavat
5 months ago |Panasonic is so BORING!
kesztió
5 months ago |As opposite, Canon is very-very refreshing and exciting. Just take a look on their great success with EOS-M.
Anonymous
5 months ago |sadly enough it has been successful , I’m telling you here when Canon or Nikon come out with a proper Mirrorless camera mFT becomes a bit player. Brand power cannot be ignored , to many Panasonic is TV maker
NFT
5 months ago |yeah Canon EOS M is hybrid AF and very fast sssss AF . Ha Ha Ha
lnqo-M
5 months ago |Well, a systen by GH3, 7-14mm F4, 12-35mm F2.8, 35-100mm F2.8 and 150mm F2.8 ++++++ is not boring.
Bob B.
5 months ago |+1
Yeah…lately….what happened?
Leendert
5 months ago |Nice!
The new Canon 300mm f2.8 is too expensive for me (about 6000 euro ???). The old Canon 300mm f2.8 is about 3000 euro now (thats a good price, but still too expensive for most m43 users).
I like the Canon 300mm F4 or 400mm F5.6. Very sharp and good price!
The best is two new Panasonic 300mm primes:
- 300mm f4 (1000 – 1500 euro)
- 300mm f2.8 (3000 – 5000 euro)
- high quality 1.4x and 2x teleconverters
A pro version of the Panasonic 100-300mm would be nice too! Very sharp, weather sealed 100-300mm (or 200-400mm) F4 (And good iq with 1.4x TC).
lnqo-M
5 months ago |Why not a 150mm F2.8 and 2x convert.
lnqo-M
5 months ago |We need a 1.4x, 2x converters in m43 now.
JF
5 months ago |+1 I would buy a 1.4x teleconverter to go with 35-100 f2.8. It would make a 50-140 f4 lens
Leendert
5 months ago |For birding 400mm+ is very nice.
300m is limited.
Muffler
5 months ago |Try the Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 OS. It is half the price of the Canon 300, is very nearly as sharp at 300mm, and it zooms too.
Pavlo
5 months ago |Hi I seem to be Pavlo now, I keep getting Name and Email filled in with other posters info, but realy prefer to be spam.
admin
5 months ago |Hi!
We are having a problem with the cache. We will try to fix it this afternoon. Sorry!
avds
5 months ago |Sorry Admin, but I can’t see anything there that could suggest Panasonic are actually busy developing “lenses for sport photographers”.
They are just admitting they don’t have such a lens and ruminating that they would have to work hard to deliver that – if they had any such plan.
Nat Whilk
5 months ago |+1
“We haven’t achieved X” != “We will get to X”
Yun
5 months ago |Exciting debate among folks here , PD or CD .
I prefer to leave this topic alone .
All I want is 300 mm f2.8 or even 600mm F2.8 , this surely will power up M4/3′s arsenal although I still hope that it can be more faster .
With further improvement in the sensor , thing will get even better .
Leendert
5 months ago |600mm f2.8 is a nightmare!!!!!
Canon has a very big and expensive (12.000 euro) 600mm f4.
jOEPlOT
5 months ago |well to get the same AOV { not DOF and total light we know!!!!}as a 600mm F2.8 you would need a 300mm F2.8 which while larger than normal mFT lenses would be smaller than any FF 300mmF2.8 while giving us an effective AOV of 600mm. Look at the difference in size between the Panasonic 35-100 and the FF alternatives.
Even though as the equivalence gang like to point out it is not the same as a FF 600mm it does much the same job for us.
W. C.
5 months ago |Panasonic Lumix has lots of potential but they somehow manage to consistently fall short in their marketing and product executions. As a result, they let others eat into into their market, and themselves fail to gain a significant share. Their marketing definitely needs to improve. Hopefully they can get on the right track.
They should get some new designers and develop some cohesive design language that is distinguishable in each new model and each new generation. Every new camera model in each line that comes out from Panasonic looks quite different to the last. Understandably, the body may have to change to accomodate new hardware and features or to address ergonomical issues. GF1/GX1 seems to be the most cohesive and simplistic design, which some love and some hate. They definitely should improve on it with a built-in EVF!
Panasonic Lumix should also leverage their connection with Leica more. Mr Pepple even mentions “our relationship with Leica.” So why not market that more? It could be an advantage to Panasonic to let more people know about the cooperation and lens development between Lumix and Leica.
Perhaps they can create a leaflet/pamphlet showing the history of Lumix cameras, some behind the scenes development at Panasonic Lumix and Leica factories and HQs. Bundle this leaflet with every Lumix G camera and lens, and also make it available in retail stores and on their webpage.
Panasonic needs a product like what OM-D was to Olympus. A product that can transform the brand, that resonates across the market from beginners to enthusiasts to pros. It must be relatively affordable and can match the quality and IQ in this fierce and finicky market. GH3 has the tech and the IQ but they need this in a smaller package with less emphasis on the pro video features. Whether it’s in an upcoming GX2 camera or a L1 m43 remake or something completely different, they need to get this to market this year. And they should develop a better kit lens for it than the 14-42 G OIS and the 14-42 PZ OIS. A variable aperture zoom that sits below the 12-35 f/2.8 but that is better than the slow kit zooms already offered. And also offer it bundled with one of their better primes as they did with the GF1.
They need to be bolder and stop worrying about cannabilising their own products. If they want to go “high end” or “pro”, they must not forget the middle ground or “enthusiast” market. The entry level is already oversatured (pardon the pun) with frequent releases and minor iterations of minor iterations of minor iterations. They need a camera between the G5 and GH3. $600 to $1300 is too great a product gap. Hopefully they will announce such a camera at CP+ this year.
Anonymous
5 months ago |They need a L-1 Between the size of the Original L-1 and the GX-1. With the VF and 2-position flash.
*DROOL*
Rocky Pesik
5 months ago |About time we have decent lenses for sport.
Alberto
5 months ago |Well Im excited to hear that they are developing telephoto lenses for m43, as a wildlife photographer, thats the only thing that is preventing me to switch completely to that format… They did a great job on the macro side…
Chez Wimpy
5 months ago |“a 600mm f/2.8 would be a great thing to have. We don’t have that yet.”
Nor does anyone else in the history of the world for that matter.