[UncleVanya]

In m43 I prefer Panasonic. The gx7 with rudimentary 2 axis or 3 axis ibis crushed the em5 5 axis ibis in head to head tests. Panasonic menus and controls just work.

As for trying m43. Get a gx-1. 16mp, and cheap on ebay. No ibis which stinks, but it is a nice try it camera.

Also whoever said the 25 f1.8 was a premium lens... Uh no. It costs the same as most of the kit lenses at least new. Used on EvilBay I see it for $130 buy it now. A premium lens in that focal length is the Panasonic Leica f1.4 at $600. But a really premium lens would be the Panasonic Leica 42.5 f1.2 at $1400...

[jimr-pdx]

In m43 I prefer Panasonic.
...

I agree, the Only menu system gave me brain cramps I needed K-5 therapy to recover. With ibis and wr the gx8 looks nice to me, some dealers were tossing in the $500msrp 12-60 (24-120mme) wx sealed lens, not a bad deal at all. Note that until the most recent models the accursed shutter shock has been documented as an issue, though it can be avoided.

I tried em10 and em5 but really enjoyed the GM1, q-size but 4thirds sensor.

[ChristianRock]

Also whoever said the 25 f1.8 was a premium lens... Uh no. It costs the same as most of the kit lenses at least new. Used on EvilBay I see it for $130 buy it now. A premium lens in that focal length is the Panasonic Leica f1.4 at $600. But a really premium lens would be the Panasonic Leica 42.5 f1.2 at $1400...

The Oly 25 1.8 costs 399 dollars everywhere. The DA 35 2.4 is 146 dollars.

[UncleVanya]

The Oly 25 1.8 costs 399 dollars everywhere. The DA 35 2.4 is 146 dollars.

And the used prices? By this measure what do you think the real "premium" lenses should be called? The DA 35 price didn't start there nor did the Olympus 25mm f/1.8 - price fluctuations due to demand and company policies do not determine the worth of a lens optically. This is a very small petty point that has little relationship to optical quality. What 25mm lens would you put up from Olympus against the 35 prime on Pentax? Or what Pentax prime would you put up against that Olympus lens?

[audiobomber]

Olympus and Panasonic have some fine lenses, but resolution is limited by the sensor. According to DXOMark, the DA 35mm f2.4 on a K-3 is considerably sharper than the Panasonic 17mm f1.7 on any body. (DXO hasn't tested the Oly, but it is supposedly not as sharp as the Panasonic.)
https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/smc-DA-35mm-F2.4-AL-on-P...6_901_1596_909

"But how does it stack up to the Panasonic? Well, I will tell you right off the bat that while it is not as sharp as the Panasonic, it gets about 99.5% there. It does not have the Micro Contrast of the Panasonic, but gets us about 90% of the way there. It vignettes slightly when wide open where the Panasonic does not but it does focus slightly faster and like I said, it is quite a bit smaller as you will see below in the size comparison."

The Olympus 25 1.8 Lens Review on the E-M1 – STEVE HUFF PHOTOS

[ChristianRock]

And the used prices? By this measure what do you think the real "premium" lenses should be called? The DA 35 price didn't start there nor did the Olympus 25mm f/1.8 - price fluctuations due to demand and company policies do not determine the worth of a lens optically. This is a very small petty point that has little relationship to optical quality. What 25mm lens would you put up from Olympus against the 35 prime on Pentax? Or what Pentax prime would you put up against that Olympus lens?

Ok. So you think it's fair to compare the 399 dollar lens with the 146 dollar one. It's your choice. You are aware that the Pentax DA 40 Limited (a premium lens) sells for less than the Olympus 25mm, right? The DA 35 2.8 Limited (US$496) is only 25% more expensive than the Oly 25 1.8. It might be a better comparison.

Olympus has a more budget oriented 25mm f/2.8 lens by the way... but it's still quite a bit more than the Pentax 35 2.4. Don't get mad just because Pentax is a great value... when you factor in how good the DA 35 2.4 is on the K-1, it's actually an unbelievable value... I don't know why anyone would move to the more expensive micro 4/3 system unless one wants to focus on video...

[redcat]

I don't know why anyone would move to the more expensive micro 4/3 system unless one wants to focus on video...

yeah, pretty strange, I'd think about moving to a7 series if I want something smaller, has full frame sensor and better video but 4/3 sensor is just out of the question

[mano]

Funny, over the last weeks I also looked at some 43 cameras. There are quite a few people out there who switched and do not miss APSC.

I'm not sure if I will be one of them, but I just bought a second hand em5 with the 12-50mm lens for 380€, I think I can sell the camera with little loss if I decide it's not for me. I will take a good look at Pentax' next APSC model in any case - or maybe get the K1 next year, unless I started to build a 43 system by then.

[BigMackCam]

When I look at the RAW output from different cameras, I'm amazed at how good the micro four thirds sensors are now, particularly with regard to high ISO performance, but it's the sensor resolution and, therefore, reproduction of detail that puts me off a little. In most real-world shooting it really shouldn't matter much, but there will be situations (aside from pixel-peeping) where it does. Cropping comes to mind...

[mecrox]

Ok. So you think it's fair to compare the 399 dollar lens with the 146 dollar one. It's your choice. You are aware that the Pentax DA 40 Limited (a premium lens) sells for less than the Olympus 25mm, right? The DA 35 2.8 Limited (US$496) is only 25% more expensive than the Oly 25 1.8. It might be a better comparison.

Olympus has a more budget oriented 25mm f/2.8 lens by the way... but it's still quite a bit more than the Pentax 35 2.4. Don't get mad just because Pentax is a great value... when you factor in how good the DA 35 2.4 is on the K-1, it's actually an unbelievable value... I don't know why anyone would move to the more expensive micro 4/3 system unless one wants to focus on video...

This isn't about money, within reason, nor about singing the praises of one against another. It's about what best suits someone and enables them to do what they want to do. You need to get away from comparing internet charts and sticker prices and look instead at the experience and the results. If something does what you want it to do but costs a little more, it is probably better than something which doesn't at any price. It's clear that M43 suits a lot of people just fine. Tomorrow it may not, but as things are today it does. I haven't found M43 more expensive than an equivalent set-up on Pentax, incidentally, since Pentax prices here are high anyway. If internet charts were all that counted then few would buy a Canon camera, but as we know Canon remain the best-selling brand year in year out and people seem very happy with their purchase.

There is a great deal to be said for forgetting system and format wars and instead getting to know one system so well that you can work around its foibles and take damn good images in any situation. Isn't this what most folks would like to do? No one needs much kit to achieve this - 3-4 lenses will cover nearly everything for most folks.

BTW, the Oly 25mm f1.8 is a modern digital-era lens with a fast motor and metal mount whereas the Pentax 35mm f2.4 is a film-era refurb with screwdrive AF and a plastic mount - very good value for sure but you are getting what you (didn't) pay for and this is not comparing like with like. My own view is that it is always best to buy just a few quality lenses rather than a larger number of perhaps iffy or el cheapo ones. Good glass matters. Too many lenses is a waste of money and good ones usually keep their resale values well.

[surfar]

the K-1, which is a very awesome first try for Pentax

I want a flagship

Considering you are prepared to outlay 1300, id suggest the K1....some are still available at the pre increase price and theres the odd used body becoming available.


All your lenses will work in some way immediately.Crop mode at 16mp, no problems and a better image than the K50( I also had 2).


In FF mode the 35/50 are good and those zooms vignette slightly at the wide end.


Now, ive got a basic M43 system...its great BUT...I wouldn't leave it for any Oly or Pano.


Perhaps you should go rent a K1, its a good walkaround with those 2 plastic fantastics.See how it feels and compare it with the k50.(I have sold 1 of mine)

[wildman]

need to get away from comparing internet charts and sticker prices and look instead at the experience and the results.

Blasphemy!

[BigMackCam]

There is a great deal to be said for forgetting system and format wars and instead getting to know one system so well that you can work around its foibles and take damn good images in any situation.

That's one of the reasons the Q range has a loyal following. You simply have to accept it has limitations... and once you do that, it's a very liberating experience

[ChristianRock]

This isn't about money, within reason, nor about singing the praises of one against another. It's about what best suits someone and enables them to do what they want to do. You need to get away from comparing internet charts and sticker prices and look instead at the experience and the results. If something does what you want it to do but costs a little more, it is probably better than something which doesn't at any price. It's clear that M43 suits a lot of people just fine. Tomorrow it may not, but as things are today it does. I haven't found M43 more expensive than an equivalent set-up on Pentax, incidentally, since Pentax prices here are high anyway. If internet charts were all that counted then few would buy a Canon camera, but as we know Canon remain the best-selling brand year in year out and people seem very happy with their purchase.

There is a great deal to be said for forgetting system and format wars and instead getting to know one system so well that you can work around its foibles and take damn good images in any situation. Isn't this what most folks would like to do? No one needs much kit to achieve this - 3-4 lenses will cover nearly everything for most folks.

BTW, the Oly 25mm f1.8 is a modern digital-era lens with a fast motor and metal mount whereas the Pentax 35mm f2.4 is a film-era refurb with screwdrive AF and a plastic mount - very good value for sure but you are getting what you (didn't) pay for and this is not comparing like with like. My own view is that it is always best to buy just a few quality lenses rather than a larger number of perhaps iffy or el cheapo ones. Good glass matters. Too many lenses is a waste of money and good ones usually keep their resale values well.

Question... Why did you write this in reply to my post when it has zero to do with me or anything I've posted? I was never a pixel peeper and I was the one saying that comparing the Pentax 35 and Oly 25 was unfair, so why are you directing these comments at me at all?

[UncleVanya]

Ok. So you think it's fair to compare the 399 dollar lens with the 146 dollar one. It's your choice. You are aware that the Pentax DA 40 Limited (a premium lens) sells for less than the Olympus 25mm, right? The DA 35 2.8 Limited (US$496) is only 25% more expensive than the Oly 25 1.8. It might be a better comparison.

Olympus has a more budget oriented 25mm f/2.8 lens by the way... but it's still quite a bit more than the Pentax 35 2.4. Don't get mad just because Pentax is a great value... when you factor in how good the DA 35 2.4 is on the K-1, it's actually an unbelievable value... I don't know why anyone would move to the more expensive micro 4/3 system unless one wants to focus on video...

The only 25 f 2.8 Olympus is a 4/3 not m4/3 lens. You continue to show your relative lack of familiarity with this system. The fact that the Olympus costs more than the insanely valued da 35 doesn't make it a premium lens which is what I object to. Used prices (and new Gray market) are quite reasonable and in line with the prices of the m4/3 kit lenses. But you keep cherry picking and trying to justify how "premium " the lens is. It is a fine lens, but not by anyone else's definition premium.

The da 40 is a specious argument. Cross brand pricing doesn't change in brand costs and relative quality. Is Pentax a bargain - yes. What does that have to do with Olympus lenses rankings inside the system? If your point is what's a cheaper lens value that's an entirely different point. But your objection is that this lens is premium and the Pentax isn't. And there you are just plain wrong.