The Nocticron is finally in Stock at Adorama (Click here) and at BHphoto (Click here). The price is high but you get what you pay for. The fastest autofocus lens of thw rold with built-in lens stabilization!
There are a couple of new Gold Box deals at Amazon US (Click here), including one on an Olympus compact camera.
And the Olympus lens bundle deal expires tomorrow at BHphoto (Click here):
80 Responses
For little more, you get a proper cam with a small 1.8/85 lens, which takes better pics. You don’t need better pics? Why spend the money then?
Either they slash those prices, or they become fashionable, or they close down.
I think you fail to grasp the concept of early adopters paying more for something they “have to have.” This lens will likely settle into the $1200 range over time to keep sales steady as production trickles out, so for now some people will pay the full price. “Proper cam” is an entirely subjective term that displays your ignorance for product differentiation and accepted trade-offs. You should consider minimizing your photo-narcissism for the good of the community.
How many words you guys just wasted to defend a pointless gadget.
Cameras don’t take pics. Photographers do.
Glad I could clear that up for you.
I have not seen your pictures, but I am sure from what you write that they are bad. Let me guess: they are brainless pics.
You have been challenged several times to show some of YOUR illustrious pictures to which you have not responded. You just change your user name and throw dung at someone else.
If there is a “boy” on this forum, it is you. Are you so ill mannered and so poorly trained as to think it’s your right to trash everyone you can, just because you think you can HIDE?
If you really the man you think you are, try out your style of confrontation at your local tavern, . . . tell us how that works for you.
Why, do you do much taverns? I am pretty sure you’d get beaten up by guys like me if you did LOL
Not likely. . . . unless you are the type who beats up old people.
Here is what is likely. You go to ANY bar or tavern in America and start potty-mouthing everyone in the place . . . (just like you do on this forum) . . . I will bring along my “improper” Lumix GH3 to capture the excitement in dazzling “improper” HD video.
I ABSOLUTELY GUARANTEE: that you would empty out the Bar and find yourself the centerpiece in a brutal gang-ganging. I’ll be more than happy to post it on YouTube so you can show everyone how manly you are.
Your cowardly behavior on this forum is all the evidence of your “manhood” that I need.
Well I have been kidding so far, have not insulted anybody but you inferior turd really are rude. You obviously don’t know that name calling is no good, inferior turd. Your stupid mother did not teach you, inferior turd?
Now, that was rude. You called for it, inferior turd.
I assume you are looking in the mirror?
You sir are obviously right but note the trolls here: they probably work for M43 manufacturers themselves. It is especially funny to see the high and mighty tone of some – like that “you sir are oblivious” turd.
No photo art is going to come out of those brains, to be sure.
Photo art is certainly coming from my Lumix G6 and makrs dSLR zealots, including seasoned FF photogrsphers scratching their heads as to why I’m getting better pictures from my so called inferior setup.
Now if we’re all marketing people and not just users or fans, what the hell are you doing on an MFT site? TROLLING or just working for Canon/Nikon?
You can take pictures? Interesting.
like what? an aps-c sensor camera? how can you define proper such a smalled sensor camera?
oh, you ment 35mm cameras? but those are expensive as hell, and their sensor sucks compared to pro medium format cameras.
do a favor to this blog, go freak yourself with a 35mm mount.
LOL I crap on your puny overpriced… ehm… sensor. Tell me, do you “freak yourself” a lot with it?
The Nikon D610+ excellent Nikon 85mm or Canon 6d with Canon 85are cheaper than the cheapest mFT { with built in EVF and weather sealing} with this $1600 joke
MF digital is a one trick pony at low ISO
Now there is some long awaited GREAT news! May this lens sell like hot-cakes, including one for my GH3.
For the price, it surely be hot-space-cake 🙂
The next most expensive m4/3 prime lens is the Olympus 75mm f1.8 at $900.
The 25mm f1.4 is $530.
$1,600 for a prime is crazy money. I assume they are aiming it a professional videographers that will be using the GH4. Would make for a nice interview lens (amongst other uses).
Then again:
– Canon 85mm f1.2 is $2,100.
– Canon 50mm f1.2 is $1,600.
But those lenses have larger glass (72mm vs 67mm thread) since they are full frame, hence the expense.
I personally can’t spend the money on this one.
I would however spend $1,000 on a 17mm f1.2 or or $700 on a f1.4 !!
There are also kind of people who would say 1000 usd for a 17mm f/1.2 is crazy. And to base the value for a lens per ounce, we have people for that too, be it less or more. Its a wonderfull world after all.
Olympus hit a sweet spot with the 75/1.8. The lens is small, price is reasonable, and the bokeh potential (being 150/3.6 equivalent) comes close to the venerable Canon 135/2L.
The nocticron on the other hand with a rather uninspiring 85/2.4 equivalent will be a hard sell at $1600. The same money will get you a Zeiss 85/1.4 that will look quite spiffy on an A7 even with adapter.
Your “equivalency” is nonsense. Your bashing of the Nocticron (World Class Lens) which you have not touched let alone taken any pictures with, is typical of the trash talk which is so plentiful here.
Don’t be so butt-hurt, fanboy. I did not bash anything, just made valid observations. And just because you don’t understand something doesn’t make it nonsense.
Like I said “trash-talk”.
I understand that you are bashing a product you have no familiarity with, the very definition of trash-talk.
Clean up your gutter-mouth and prove that YOU are an adult.
Valid? Well, I’ve put my money where my mouth is and ordered one. I also happen to have the Voigtlander 17.5 f/0.95 which is also more expensive than the Olympus.
Now, it’s an f/1.2, not 2.4. It has the DOF of 85mm/f/2.4 but the light gathering, which is what I really care for is 1.2 because the sensor is still smaller. Bottom line, you talk the talk while I’ll walk the walk.
And I wish you the best of time with it – if it is true, which I doubt.
It’s a good job the lens is 1.2, coz those tiny sensors are about two stops noisier than the proper ones.
“Proper ones”? By who’s account?
Your so called 35mm “proper” sensor is a joke compared to any decent medium format. Now how’s “proper”? Sheesh…
Dear hapless consumer, there is less difference between 24×36 and 36×48 (the biggest digital mf) than between M43 and 24×36. You would know if you had tried, instead of tossing around in forums.
Why don’t you thank me for teaching you? Because you are part of a dumb and stubborn virtual group, lobotomized with bollox marketing. It’s fun to annoy dumb people on a dreary day, so I am happy, too.
Bollox, what on hell are you doing on an MFT page other than Trolling? Are you the evangelist trying to show us the ‘light’ of larger sensors while people with an Iphone and cheap instagram filters take better pictures than you could ever dream of? That must be so terribly painful, so you go to forums of smaller and cheaper sensors to vent out your frustration with your own incompetence. Way to go dude! You’re not teaching anyone, you’re actually making a fool of yourself and hurting decent dSLR photographers with actual valid points to support their choices.
Another non-photographing gadget nerd has spoken… The result? Bollox of course.
I am curious to hear YOUR definition of a “proper” camera. You seem to insist that people here accept your definition of “proper”.
Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines the word proper thusly:
: correct according to social or moral rules
: behaving in a way that is correct according to social or moral rules
There is almost no “proper” context for using the word proper to describe a camera. It could be said that a certain type of camera is more suited to a specific task but then you would have to define the task.
As a Tool & Die Maker, I learned that there is the “Best” tool for the job, and then there are the tools that are available. Even selection of the “BEST” tool is a judgement call made by the Skilled Tradesman.
It can be said that there is a “proper” way to use a tool. It can be said that some tools are “improper” to a given task, (if the use of said tool is likely to cause harm or increase safety risks).
I also learned that a REAL skilled person, can get the job done even if the “Best” tools are not available.
As to your insistence that others here accept your definition of a “proper camera”; well frankly, it is ludicrous when considering how “improper” your behavior is. Your behavior on this forum is so “improper” that you are compelled to change your name with nearly every post. Do you really want to talk about “proper”?
It is “improper” behavior to hide behind your anonymity while trashing others who have a GOOD name, and try to maintain their good name and “proper” comportment while some anonymous punk is cursing them and shooting spit wads.
It is “improper” behavior to post your filth under another user’s name.
It is “improper” behavior to use use another user’s name in a derisive, offensive formulation of your next user name.
It is “improper” behavior to attach profanity to another user’s name and then attack that person while hiding behind a profane version of their user name.
It is “improper” behavior to use offensive, obscene, malicious, derogatory language in a public forum.
Since your behavior on this forum is so “improper” that you feel compelled to change your name with each new post, what makes you think that anyone will accept your definition of a “proper” camera when you obviously don’t know even the meaning of the word?
I might add, it is “improper” behavior to insinuate that someone is lying without the slightest evidence to back it up.
Mike obviously knows what he is talking about. I have some knowledge of optics and photography, unlike most kids here, and I tell you this lens at this price is absurd. I am sure you are not going to buy it anyway.
Why don’t you fanboys thank us for our tips instead of barking like wounded dogs?
Obviously your so called knowledge is a heap of theories which are probably wrong and utterly disconnected from reality. I’ve already pre-ordered this lens and have tried it, it’s fabulous!
It sounds like a pathetic lie, but everybody is Rambo on the internet. Have fun, with or without the toy – and with or without the cash.
I still don’t understand why you people refuse to learn, and get mad at good advice instead.
I can’t get why people who think a bunch of superstitions are equivalent to actual physics pretend to reach me about optics.
Dictionary definition of “Bollox” . . .
bol·lix [bol-iks]
verb (used with object) Informal.
1. to do (something) badly; bungle (often followed by up ): His interference bollixed up the whole deal.
noun
2. a confused bungle.
You are wasting your time trying to reason with someone who is determined to bungle everything through sophomoric interference.
Can you use a dictionary at all? I’ll tell your chief at Panasonic to fire you, you give M43 a bad name.
Bollox,
Man , you are an optimist !if you think that these entrenched mFT fanboys will
ever understand the consequences of equivalence. It is as simple as it gets .Funnily
enough they all mange the first part of the equation, multiplying the effective
focal length by 2 due to the effect of the crop factor, pity the do not
understand/acknowledge the consequence on effective aperture when you do the
same oh well , the system will hopefully sink soon enough. $1600 for an 85mm
F2.4 equivalent should help things along
Wait.. so you’re telling us you have actually touched and taken pictures with the lens?!
Post some samples for us please!
TAZ98 – You show me the quote where I said that I touched the lens and took pictures with it. When you show me that quote I will show you the pictures.
What I did say was that Mike hasn’t touched the lens or taken any pictures with it.
Oh & I thought you had the lens..
I want to see samples from “real” people, not reviewers or testers.
Anyways, why are you calling Mike out because he hasn’t touched the lens, when you and most folks here haven’t either??
Somehow 85mm equiv is uninspiring and 150mm equiv is inspiring. Interesting…
Nope.
You missed the Voigtländer Nokton f0.95 primes.
17.5mm $1149
25mm $999
42.5mm $999
And the SLR Magic 50mm f0.95 – $1099
You can spend less than $1,600 if you’re not afraid of going manual. In that case you have some sub 1k lenses from Voigtlander and SLR Magic which are by all accounts superb.
Or you could spend $390 on a Nikon 85mm F1.8g which when mounted on any current Nikon FF will easily outperform the Panasonic. Better DOF control , better total light same AOV . Then the bonus of the current Nikon FF bodies [D610,D800,D800E, etc} will give you significantly better DR,high ISO, shadow noise etc. Better still the D610 +85mm will actually be cheaper than the Panasonic with even the cheapest mFT camera with built in EVF and weather sealing .
The 42.5 has not been tested yet but here is the Nikon 85mm against the best current mFT lens the 75mm . The 85mm is on the D610 the 75mm on the E-M5
http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Olympus-MZUIKO-DIGITAL-ED-75mm-F18-on-Olympus-OM-D-E-M5-versus-Nikon-AF-S-NIKKOR-85mm-F18G-on-Nikon-D610___898_793_823_915
Will consider getting one once dropped below 1K.
Once seen its sharpness, it’s getting harder and harder to resist to buy it. I’m going to call my local shop and ask for an estimated friendly price. 🙂
if Panasonic where to price the 42.5mm F1.2 at $1200 – they would sell like hotcakes –
but at $1600 only a handful will be sold –
Company’s like media organizations and a like have no problem spending $1600 on a lens – as many are using Medium Format cameras and FF – but I don’t think most of these are using M43 cameras much or even APS-C mirror-less –
There might be some media organizations that use the GH3 and now soon the GH4 that might buy it –
But I think $1600 is a bit much for the standard M43 buyer – I did not have an issue with getting the 35-100mm F2.8 or the 12-35mm F2.8 for around $1000 – but $1600 will not move me to buy – so I will have to be happy with my 25mm F1.4
So hopefully Panasonic listens to us on the price –
Crazy pricing. They won’t be selling many of these unfortunately.
This is the price I was expecting, and I am fine with it.
It’s a pro level lens, with no-equivalent in any other format.
( 28 degree angle of view, f/1.2, auto-focus, with optical image stabilization )
Canon makes a more expensive 85mm f/1.2, but with no optical stabilization. Canon doesn’t even make any FF camera bodies with in-camera stabilization, like the OM-D EM-1, so we are talking 3-5 additional stops of exposure when hand holding this Panasonic lens.
I will definitely buy this lens, but I’m waiting for the Panasonic GH4 to hit the stores first.
No equivalent? Are you dreaming? There are 85 mm lenses in all price brackets, and most of them allow thinner DOFs and gather more light. With those, you also get to use proper cameras.
OK, hit me with your list of equivalent lenses. Remember that they must meet the following criteria…
1- 28 degree angle of view
2- f/1.2 or faster exposure ( no light gathering bull sh*t, must be able to expose at f/1.2 or faster )
3- Fast and silent auto-focus ( so it can be used for video )
4- Must have built-in image stabilization ( for low-light and video hand-held work )
5- Must be sharp corner to corner at full aperture ( i.e. f/1.2 or faster )
1.2/42.5 on M43 is equivalent to 2.4/85 on 24×36. This is physics and there is nothing you or I can do about it. Every manuf has one or two or more of those, and they start cheap.
Fast and silent autofocus? Ever heard of Canon and Nikon?
Stabilization is surely useful for beginners and static subjects, but I only use it with long lenses. Sharp corner to corner? I don’t normally look at that, so I cannot answer, but again, I am no beginner, we look at different things.
Beginners will surely appreciate their brick walls with sharp corners, and the stabilization, which helps a lot with their static brick walls. If they improve their skill, after a few years, they will see how much money they wasted.
Where this lens has no equivalent is in price: it is simply ridiculous. But hey, go on, buy it, nobody is stopping you. Remember to post your masterpieces right?
He is never going to buy it, he is just some marketing troll. There are plenty here.
He probably cannot shoot at all. Wait, he is a seasoned pro with loads of experience and his word is gospel. LOL
>>>1.2/42.5 on M43 is equivalent to 2.4/85 on 24×36
Total Bullsh*t.
If you need F-stop 1.2 to obtain correct exposure, then ONLY a lens that is f/1.2 or faster will meet the criteria.
This is a very simple photography exposure principal that I have used over the past 30 years when shooting on everything from a tiny Minox camera, 35mm Nikons, 6x6cm Hasselblads, 6x7cm Mamiyas, 4×5 inch and 8×10 inch Sinars, and once with a 20×24 inch Polaroid camera.
In this specifica instance, anything less than F-stop 1.2 is TOO slow for correct exposure.
>>>This is physics and there is nothing you or I can do about it.
Exactly. F-stop 1.2 has a very specific light intensity value given the light being reflected/transmitted by your subject, so ANYTHING less than F-stop 1.2 is UNDER exposed, if correct exposure REQUIRES F-stop 1.2.
>>>Fast and silent autofocus? Ever heard of Canon and Nikon?
With standard Canon and Nikon lenses, you will often pick-up the autofocus motors when shooting video with on-camera microphones, the focusing motors are just TOO noisy for video.
Canon has gone as far as creating the Canon STM lens line to shoot video with their cameras, because of this AF lens noise.
>>>Stabilization is surely useful for beginners and static subjects, but I only use it with long lenses.
Stabilization gives still photo shooters up to 3-5 f-stops of additional exposure, and for video shooters it eliminates motion “jitter” caused by trying to shoot a hand-held video shot without some sort of stabilization.
There are lots of conditions, where you can ONLY get the shot with a good stabilization system.
>>>Sharp corner to corner? I don’t normally look at that, so I cannot answer, but again, I am no beginner, we look at different things.
This was one of the first things I learned to evaluate as a working pro photographer in the early 80’s. You found out really quick, which lenses were usable at full aperture, and which ones had to be stopped down 2 stops to obtain a sharp image in the corners. This was true for both 35mm lenses and medium format lenses. The good ones ( often the expensive ones ) where sharp wide open.
For example, with Canon and Nikon Full Frame cameras their standard 50mm lenses are very soft in the corners at full aperture. The $4,000 Zeiss 55mm f/1.4 Otus lens doesn’t have this problem, and their is a good chance the new Sigma ART 50mm f/1.4 lens will perform close to what the Otus lens does.
Most of the Canon and Nikon telephoto lenses are quite sharp at full aperture, but their standard and wide lenses are often very soft in the corners.
With the higher performance ( and higher priced ) Olympus and Panasonic micro 4/3 lenses, pretty much everything is sharp from corner to corner at full aperture. This goes for wide-angles, standard lenses, and telephoto lenses. Some of this is because of the mirror-less lens design, that does not have to deal with the large mirror space between the back of the lens and the camera sensor, and some of this is from very good lens design. ( micro 4/3 has “dogs” too, but most of these are the early kit lenses )
>>>Where this lens has no equivalent is in price: it is simply ridiculous. But hey, go on, buy it, nobody is stopping you. Remember to post your masterpieces right?
I’ve been mainly a video shooter for the past 10 years ( which is why stabilization and AF noise are a big deal to me ), but I plan on getting back into professional stills work again. Clients are asking if I want the stills work, and it would be a nice break from video production. ( video requires a lot more production work than still shooting ever did )
Thank you Guy McLoughlin for this precise and full explanation, though I feel you’re wasting words on a bunch of ‘know it all’ bigoted ignorant people who swear by the almighty gods of 35mm. I bet they still use scratched old vinyl discs for their ‘superior’ sound too.
Actually, the “bunch of ‘know it all’ bigoted ignorant people who swear by the almighty gods of 35mm.” . . . may turn out to be just one flaming Troll who assumes a different user name with nearly every post.
I will refer henceforth to him as Joe “proper camera”X. His ONLY purpose is to offend everyone on the forum till we quit meeting here and to cowardly insult as many people as he can per minute.
He has begun logging in as me and insulting other people under my user name. If someone posts something truly sickeningly “improper” under the guise of an sophomoric construct of your user name or someone else’s user ID, or using one of your bullet points in a childish construct of your user name, . . . it’s our resident pygmy TROLL, Joe “proper camera”X. He is just ONE person.
Why do you insult people who know more than you? It is
1) a sign of utter stupidity
2) rude
I am a nice guy but I can see how you piZZed off someone.
YOU say that your are a nice guy. Your post suggests something entirely different. No YOU haven’t seen anything yet.
You don’t mind if I call you boy now do ya boy?
Guy, I do stills, not video. If I ever need video, I will buy a video cam.
I am sure you make some valid points for video, but they are moot for stills; example; autofocus, stabilizer. The requirements are really different when you look for the best.
The problem with ISO and equivalences escapes you entirely; you are obviously not a techie – nothing wrong about it but you could learn a thing or two.
If you are convinced some of those things have superb performance, who am I to show you the light? Enjoy. I will enjoy my vastly superior small format setups, which cost less, given optical equivalence.
>>>If I ever need video, I will buy a video cam.
Most DSLRs and Mirror-less cameras are hybrids, that shoot both still photos and video. Many feature films have been shot in the past few years using Canon DSLR cameras and Panasonic mirror-less cameras.
Last year Shane Carruth won for the second time at the Sundance film festival, for a feature film shot with Panasonic GH2 cameras.
>>>I am sure you make some valid points for video, but they are moot for stills; example; autofocus, stabilizer
I disagree when it comes to stabilization. If you’ve ever shot hand-held at low shutter speeds ( say less than 1/30th second ), there is a huge difference when shooting with a stabilized system versus a non-stabilized system. You can easily see for yourself with any Canon or Nikon stabilized lens, by simply shooting with the stabilization ON vs OFF. There’s a big difference here.
This has been one of the big selling points for the Olympus OM-D EM-1 camera, with it’s built-in 5-axis image stabilization. Many pros are finding that the 5-axis IBIS is giving them a near perfect “hit” rate when shooting with very slow shutter speeds.
>>>The problem with ISO and equivalences escapes you entirely; you are obviously not a techie – nothing wrong about it but you could learn a thing or two.
ISO and equivalences depends entirely on the technology involved to produce the final image. You can’t assume that all sensor technology or the electronics package that processes the signal from the sensor will be the same for all cameras, they obviously aren’t.
The simplest example of how different the systems are between different cameras, is that Panasonic mirror-less cameras do not have a maximum shooting time for video, while almost all Canon and Nikon DSLR cameras have a very clear maximum shooting time. With the new Nikon D4s, it’s only 10 minutes when shooting video at 42 Mbps.
This short shooting time cut-off is largely caused by the camera sensors and the electronics packages that support them over heating.
Pansonic mirror-less cameras don’t have this problem. You can shoot hours of video with no heat problems with Panasonic cameras.
>>>If you are convinced some of those things have superb performance, who am I to show you the light? Enjoy. I will enjoy my vastly superior small format setups, which cost less, given optical equivalence.
One of the first things you learn as a working pro, is to use what ever technology/gear that gets the job done. Annie Leibowitz has shot magazine covers with the $4 plastic Diana camera, which was probably initially done as a stunt, but when you look a the final image there is a very specific visual esthetic in the images created by the Diana camera.
Before computer retouching was around, you had to shoot many advertising shots with an 8×10 inch camera, because the retouching was actually done on the physical negative or transparency. This was why I shot with a Sinar 8×10 inch camera in the 80’s and 90’s.
Then the Scitech digital film drum scanner started to change all this in the early 90’s, so agencies would no longer pay high still photo fees because they no longer needed a perfect “in camera” shot, as they could fix things with the Scitech. ( this is one reason why I got out shooting professionally )
…The bottom line is to not become married to any one technology, but to use any technology that gets the job done. In some cases the best camera choice might be shooting with a digital 4×5 inch camera back, or a digital medium format camera, or a Nikon D800e, or an Olympus OM-D EM-1, or a Pansonic GH4.
All of these camera systems have strengths and weaknesses, so the “one size fits all” approach is a very bad idea. Pick the best tool for the job, and there will be lots of times where a Micro 4/3 camera might be the best tool.
Manfrotto pocket tripods cost 25 EUR and beat stabilizers. Try them, you will like them.
So much BS in one post , it really is staggering how so many retards can be users of one system . Only the mFT fans [ typically Olympus fans} are too dumb to understand equivalence, you never see this in Canon,Nikon, or Sony APS or even 1″ users. little sensor syndrome is alive and well.
This is why mFT forums are the laughing stock of the photographic sites on the internet. There is no magic in mFT lenses, making lenses for a much smaller { a quarter the area of FF} , 4×3 ratio sensor is simply easier. Look at even the crappiest APS lens { Sony seem to make quite a few} now look at the results if you crop the file to a 4×3 ratio and you magically have a much better performer.
Comparing lenses by the same nominal F number is downright foolish.The Nikon CX 35mm F1.2 is not equivalent to the Panasonic just as the 42.5 is not equivalent to the Canon 85mm F1.2. If you truly understood what an F-stop and exposure actually meant.You wouldn’t be jumping on this fools quest. When compared apples to apples , same DOF same AOV and same total light F1.2 on mFT is exactly equivalent to F2.4 on FF. Only mFT fanboys think they can dodge physics.
Very bad answer which was to be expected.
In truth, the imager format doesn’t matter to me since I own a number of systems, but what I have always been interested in is a 28 degree angle of view (ie, portrait) lens with a 70mm+ aperture for under $2k. I would have paid $1500 for that privilege, although I only had to pay 130,000yen back in 2005 for such a lens. Now in 2014 Panasonic is selling a 28degree FOV lens for similar cash, only this is saddled with a much smaller 35mm aperture. The upside is OIS, but after nine years of using this style of lens, I find IS is just not
necessary at this degree of magnification and the intended (shallow-DOF
portrait) use. At 28 degrees, I find “people shake” aligns well with the same shutter intervals as
“camera shake.” Corner to corner sharpness with a smaller 35mm aperture is a
given (and my lens does fine there), but having a full 71mm aperture for extra subject isolation (who cares what the OOF corners MTF might reveal) is something I find necessary to justify the cost. To each their own.
Best indication of whether a lens is priced too high or not is whether it’s price drops over time. This is more likely if there is another comparable lens. Lens like olympus 75mm f.18, 20mm f1.7 (before oly’s 17mm came out) and now 12-40mm f2.8 held their prices well. While lens like the 12-35 (due to 12-40) dropped quite significantly. Hobbyist don’t buy an overly expensive lens unless they know it’ll keep it’s value. Having owned most m/43 lens I think while this lens is excellent the market of full-time pros on gh4s still isn’t all that large. On top of the fact that there is a similar focal length (oly 45mm) at like $300. I understand the notricon is a vastly superior lens but given the price difference of 1:5 i’d say the notricon will drop down a little to around $1300 after 6 months.
I tried 85mm F1.8 on canon and it is very painful, the video shake makes me want to puke, hope the IS on this one is good enough.
You have to use tripods and learn some basic technique. Gear alone won’t get you anywhere.
admin, this poster is pretending to be me and insulting other people.
Please remove malicious post.
You need to stop posing as other users and insulting people in someone else’s name.
This is most COWARDLY, reprehensible “improper” childish behavior yet a new low for even you.
If you feel man enough to insult other people, do it using your own name.
Moderator, I would like to have this post removed. It was posted under a childish construct of my username, with the intent of insulting another user and making me look like the guilty party.
Joe “proper camera”X has NO RIGHT to pose as me and hurl insults at others. There is no worse breakdown that this forum could suffer.
Please. . . Please remove the post from “Dolbydunn to Nelson” It is NOT my post. I don’t know Nelson and would not insult him for any reason on Earth.
I would gladly apologize to Nelson but I have’t done anything to him. I believe this post came from the same malicious thug who insulted my 82 year old Mother with some of the most horrible things I’ve ever heard. THANK YOU, Sir for removing that ugly post . . . Tomorrow is my mother’s birthday.
the REAL dolbydunn
Nelson, I did not post this insult at you. I am appealing to the moderator to remove it. This clown is posting as 100 different people trying to disrupt these forums.
It looks like the work of resident TROLL – Joe”proper camera”X
Notice too, that Joe”proper camera”X also misspelled my username. He doesn’t care he is just trying to insult and harass everyone he can and drive you away from the forum.
Nobody would buy this lens if the OIS wasn’t very good, especially at this price.
What about OMD users? Have they already got the rattlesnake bogeymen? I personally wouldn’t speak on behalf of everyone, including GH shooters. After all, Canon and Nikon have been selling unstabilized f1,2 lenses for decades and at a higher price tag.
I could be wring, but I’d say hardly anyone would be buying it if first and foremost image quality, responsiveness and built quality weren’t up to the price tag. Having OIS is cool of course.
To all those calling me a bluff, you could have called me a fool, that might have made more sense, but there you go… You can feel as high and mighty as you wish, bottom line is that I’m getting this lens, I’m getting great shots, you’re getting nothing other than a silly sense of empty superiority. Enjoy your cake 🙂
Order Status
Description
QTY
Phase #1: Back Ordered
February 12, 2014 / SubTotal: $2,986.04 / Tax: $0.00
/ Shipping $83.90 / Total: $3,069.94
Hoya 58mm HD2 Protector, 8-layer Multi-Coated Glass Filter
SKU: (HY58PHD2)
Status: Pending
2
Hoya 67mm HD2 Protector, 8-layer Multi-Coated Glass Filter
SKU: (HY67PHD2)
Status: Pending
1
New Leaf
PLUS – 5 Year Camera Lens Service Plan with Accidental Damage Coverage
(for Drops & Spills) for Product’s Retailing up
SKU: (NLLEA5U1K)
Status: Pending
1
New Leaf
PLUS – 5 Year Camera Lens Service Plan with Accidental Damage Coverage
(for Drops & Spills) for Product’s Retailing up
SKU: (NLLEA5U2K)
Status: Pending
1
Olympus LC-61B, Black Metal Front Lens Cap for 75mm f/1.8 Micro 4/3 Lens
SKU: (IOMLC61BK)
Status: Pending
1
Olympus LH-61F, Black Metal Lens Hood for 75mm f/1.8 Micro 4/3 Lens
SKU: (IOMLH61FBK)
Status: Pending
1
Olympus M. Zuiko Digital 75mm f/1.8 Lens, Black – for Micro Four Thirds System
SKU: (IOM7518MB)
Status: Pending
1
Panasonic Leica DG Nocticron 42.5mm f/1.2 ASPH / POWER O.I.S Lens for Micro Four Thirds Lens Mount System
SKU: (IPC425)
Status: Back Ordered
1
Pro Optic 67mm Center Pinch Lens Cap
SKU: (PROCLF67)
Status: Back Ordered
1
You should not have to justify yourself like this. No reasonable person of good will on this forum ever doubted your veracity. I am sorry I didn’t speak up sooner.
The ONE person who questioned your sincerity about the Nocticron lens is the least deserving of any proof of your sincerity.
Happy for you (and a little jealous), Have fun with the GREAT Nocticron lens!
Wow, $1600 for a lens that works the same as an 85mm F2.4 lens on FF , if only there was such a thing lol . Wait a minute there are plenty of them the excellent 85mm F1.8 Nikon costs a quarter what this does and will blow it away { resolution ,DOF control etc} on any current FF camera
The
cheapest mFT with an EVF and weather sealing is the E-M5 .The Panasonic 42.5mm + E-M5 costs $2400. That is more than the D610+ Nikon 85mm and more than the 6D + Canon 85mm , you get better image quality in every way. DR, better High ISO , better shadow noise,
higher resolution, better DOF control, better handling all for less cash. Make you wonder how much you pay for being pussies that can’t manage to carry a DSLR
The D610 + 85mm weighs 1.1kg just think what you could do if only you could manage to lift the extra weight
Joe “proper camera”X back again eh? Up to the same old sophomoric name-calling and ONCE AGAIN assuming a NEW user name (a childish user name which ironically describes YOU more than it does anyone else).
Are you under ORDERS to be such a rude punk, or can you just not help yourself?
Like I said earlier, You don’t appear to have ever had any moral training, and if you did you should have listened a little better.
Your adolescent behavior on this forum is “improper”. I just want to identify you so that everyone here KNOWS that you are only one “little-man” with no sense of decency.
You ONLY resemble the brat at the back of the class who is causing a constant commotion and shooting spit-wads at the backs of you betters.
You don’t if I call you boy now do ya boy?