Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Lumix 8mm Fisheye, just 165 grams!

Expand Messages
  • jrgen_schrader
    http://www.panasonic.net/avc/lumix/systemcamera/gms/lens/g_fisheye_8.html
    Message 1 of 7 , Jun 1, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
    • Trausti Hraunfjord
      Comparing that to the 485 gram Zuiko 8mm... ... it is getting more and more interesting to try out the mirrorless systems. ... [Non-text portions of this
      Message 2 of 7 , Jun 1, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        Comparing that to the 485 gram Zuiko 8mm... ... it is getting more and more
        interesting to try out the mirrorless systems.

        On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 3:39 AM, jrgen_schrader <panorama@...>wrote:

        >
        >
        > http://www.panasonic.net/avc/lumix/systemcamera/gms/lens/g_fisheye_8.html
        >
        >


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • jrgen_schrader
        Yes, very tempting, indeed. If there wasn t a price tag with over 800 EUR just for the lens.
        Message 3 of 7 , Jun 1, 2010
        • 0 Attachment
          Yes, very tempting, indeed.
          If there wasn't a price tag with over 800 EUR just for the lens.


          --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Trausti Hraunfjord <trausti.hraunfjord@...> wrote:
          >
          > Comparing that to the 485 gram Zuiko 8mm... ... it is getting more and more
          > interesting to try out the mirrorless systems.
          >
          > On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 3:39 AM, jrgen_schrader <panorama@...>wrote:
          >
          > >
          > >
          > > http://www.panasonic.net/avc/lumix/systemcamera/gms/lens/g_fisheye_8.html
          > >
          > >
          >
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
        • Ian Wood
          That lens and a GF1 come to less than 500g, and nice small dimensions as well. Ian
          Message 4 of 7 , Jun 1, 2010
          • 0 Attachment
            That lens and a GF1 come to less than 500g, and nice small dimensions as well.

            Ian



            On 1 Jun 2010, at 10:09, "jrgen_schrader" <panorama@...> wrote:

            > Yes, very tempting, indeed.
            > If there wasn't a price tag with over 800 EUR just for the lens.
            >
            >
            > --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Trausti Hraunfjord <trausti.hraunfjord@...> wrote:
            >>
            >> Comparing that to the 485 gram Zuiko 8mm... ... it is getting more and more
            >> interesting to try out the mirrorless systems.
            >>
            >> On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 3:39 AM, jrgen_schrader <panorama@...>wrote:
            >>
            >>>
            >>>
            >>> http://www.panasonic.net/avc/lumix/systemcamera/gms/lens/g_fisheye_8.html
            >>>
            >>>
            >>
            >>
            >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            >>
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > ------------------------------------
            >
            > --
            >
            >
            >
          • robert
            Yes, it would seem to be perfect system for a pole, too bad they don t make a full frame 4/3 system since this fisheye is a 16mm equivent and that means 6
            Message 5 of 7 , Jun 1, 2010
            • 0 Attachment
              Yes, it would seem to be perfect system for a pole, too bad they don't make a full frame "4/3" system since this fisheye is a 16mm equivent and that means 6 around. Not quite as wonderful for a pole system.

              Wonder how it might function if shaved and stuck on a Canon FF DSLR?

              For those of you that have jumped into 4/3 how are the remote control options?

              Regards,

              Robert
            • Robert C. Fisher
              ... The 4/3rds system is full frame since it s specs indicate a certain frame size. Since the frame size is a bit smaller than FF35 or APS-C To get coverage
              Message 6 of 7 , Jun 1, 2010
              • 0 Attachment
                On Jun 1, 2010, at 9:14 AM, robert wrote:

                > Yes, it would seem to be perfect system for a pole, too bad they
                > don't make a full frame "4/3" system since this fisheye is a 16mm
                > equivent and that means 6 around. Not quite as wonderful for a pole
                > system.
                >

                The 4/3rds system is full frame since it's specs indicate a certain
                frame size. Since the frame size is a bit smaller than FF35 or APS-C
                To get coverage similar to an 8mm on either a FF35 or APS-C the lens
                needs to be 4-6mm.

                >
                > Wonder how it might function if shaved and stuck on a Canon FF DSLR?
                >

                Wouldn't work at all since the flange focal distance is really short.
                With micro 4/3 yo can use almost any lens on it due to the very short
                FFD and no mirror. Having such a short FFD and smaller frame is also
                how you can design very small lenses. Lenses for Leica range finders
                are 1/2 the size of Nikon/Canon lenses mainly due to the decreased FFD.

                >
                > For those of you that have jumped into 4/3 how are the remote
                > control options?
                >

                I have been looking into using either a GF-1 or GH-1 for a time lapse
                project and you can use almost any remote with the addition of some
                resistors. A small adapter cable would do the trick.

                >
                > Regards,
                >
                > Robert
                >
                >
                >

                Cheers
                Robert C. Fisher
                VR Photography / Cinematography
                bob@...
                http://www.rcfisher.com
                Facebook - Robert C. Fisher






                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • John Riley
                ... I have an Olympus E-P2 (love it!) and it has the typical USB connector for a wired remote. I bought a wireless remote that has a receiver plugged into the
                Message 7 of 7 , Jun 1, 2010
                • 0 Attachment
                  On Jun 1, 2010, at 12:14 PM, robert wrote:

                  > For those of you that have jumped into 4/3 how are the remote control options?
                  >
                  > Regards,
                  >
                  > Robert



                  I have an Olympus E-P2 (love it!) and it has the typical USB connector for a wired remote. I bought a wireless remote that has a receiver plugged into the USB and it does everything the wired one can do.

                  The tiny micro 4/3 lenses are very nice to use. I have the Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 and it is just amazing; the kit 14-42 that came with the camera is good and very compact. I am having a whole lot of fun using old Olympus Pen-F lenses. I have been very pleasantly surprised by the build and image quality of those lenses. So far, I have the 38mm, 100mm, 150mm, and 250mm Pen-F lenses. The 100mm is only about the size of a Snickers candy bar. I barely stopped myself from buying the Pen-F 400mm that sold recently on ebay for $1500. My wife said she would kill me in my sleep if I bought it 8-) I don't ' think she has any idea how many of the Pen-F lenses I have, especially since I have two each of the 250mm and 100mm. I may have a problem; is there a support group for obsessive lens collectors? If there is, I bet Luca Vascon is a founding member 8-)

                  BTW - I am going to be selling off all of my old Nikon and related pano gear; I will start a separate thread on that, however.

                  John

                  John Riley
                  4Pi-VR Media Solutions
                  http://4pi-vr.com
                  johnriley@...
                  (h)864-461-3504
                  (c)864-431-7075
                  (w)864-503-5775



                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.