answers: 55

  1. ñ
    06.12.2020

    thanks for the review!
    It's a pity that m4 \ 3 is a dead system (IMHO)

    Reply

    • Victor
      06.12.2020

      Dead / not dead, why be sorry?

      The choice of systems and cameras is enough today for every taste and budget.

      Reply

    • Ivan
      06.12.2020

      Until Panas refuses, she cannot be called "dead".

      Reply

      • R'RёS,R ° F "RёR№
        07.12.2020

        You say it is as if cameras have ceased to be made under the Olympus brand.

        Reply

    • Not + bot
      08.12.2020

      Well, everything dies and dies ... and the phones are getting better and better ... no.

      Reply

    • максим
      17.12.2020

      Solicitor?

      Reply

    • Mitrandir
      24.12.2020

      It's a shame that you're a useless troll

      Reply

  2. Michael
    06.12.2020

    It's a pity they didn't make an analogue 77, it would be interesting

    Reply

  3. Bukozik
    06.12.2020

    The office that will buy Olympus is already making plans to release new cameras ... So no funeral service is needed)

    Reply

    • R'RёS,R ° F "RёR№
      07.12.2020

      Mikra has been buried since 2009, when she was introduced, and people who have never had cameras on this system.

      Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        07.12.2020

        In the announcement of the new OLYMPUS M.ZUIKO DIGITAL ED 150-400mm 1: 4.5 TC 1.25X IS PRO there are whole battles on this topic. Meanwhile, Olympus apologizes that does not have time to deliver this lens to everyone.

        Reply

      • Sergei
        09.12.2020

        Arkady, do you want a joke? Almost 7 years ago on your site I wrote a commentary on the review of the Olympus OM-D E-M1 with whale 12-50, and I wrote that this is all doubtful and the matrix is ​​frankly weak! But literally a year later, I sold cropped Nikons and took an E-M5 mark II with the same lens and with a similar matrix, and later, exactly like that, I settled on a microscope and overgrown with glasses. Accidentally went to read an ancient topic, it turned out funny. : D

        Reply

      • Victor
        07.12.2020

        Quite a lot and a lot are “buried”, but given the permanently low market share of Olympus, it’s surprising how he lasted 10 years in this segment.

        Reply

      • York
        07.12.2020

        Market share alone is not an indicator.
        Margin, form of ownership, relationship between shareholders / owners and management, company structure ... Lots of things.

        Fujas with Panas hold something around 5%, and do not hum very much.
        Nikon was a leader, he became unclear with what, and he is also quite holding on.
        Sigma, as it was alternatively gifted in the head, remained - a family office, what to take from them.
        Pentax is generally more like a sect, its market is zero point fucking tenths of a percent ...

        It is unlikely that the olik was bloody on its own, there are also shareholders who always have little money, and the long and fascinating history of na- and proipalov - apparently, the managers decided to yield to the pressure of the owners.

        As an owner of the oligarch, the absence of a new shmurdyak does not bother me much, but hypothetical problems with the service make me nervous.

        Reply

      • Sergei
        09.12.2020

        It's just that Olympus, like Nikon and Canon, receives his main income not from the photo department, but from medical equipment, as far as I remember. But JIP may be directly dependent on the income of the unit entrusted to it. And besides the outcome expected by many, this can turn into a “second wind” of the system and a wave of innovations.

        Even if we assume the worst case scenario, current users will not be very stressed. The service will be available, but the loose will be available for a long time. If you look at the same Minolta, there was no end of the world for its users.

        Reply

      • Michael
        09.12.2020

        How to say. Both Minolta and Pentax are very problematic systems. You can sit on them only if you have everything. Third-party vendors are quick to abandon development for such systems

        Reply

      • Sergei
        09.12.2020

        Any system is problematic to one degree or another.
        Well, I have everything, almost now and for a few more years all the glasses will be available new, and on the secondary housing for another ten and a half years. I bought myself a telephoto camera from a 4/3 mirror system, although when I started photographing on Nikons back in 2013, I did not even know that there was such a system. And I bought glass this summer, used naturally. But as it turned out that glass under the mirror Oliki ceased to be produced just the other day.
        It is clear that it makes no sense for new photographers to buy Minolta today, for example, Sonya, that is, half-mirror. But those who filmed her at the time of her death had no problems with support.
        And micra is, one might say, a complete system where everything you need is already there. What will be produced there next? Hole zooms 1.8-2? Well, only a few will buy them, obviously not those who are in a hurry to celebrate the office. Otherwise, everything is OK so far, wait and see.

        Reply

      • Michael
        09.12.2020

        Availability (you can get it) and the price of the same Pentax is such that it takes a shiver. It is clear that you can get a devil with horns, but there is a question of money and time. I don't want to be a collector) And while Olympus is still full in stores and on the secondary, there are no problems

        Reply

      • Sergei
        09.12.2020

        Personally, I like Pentax in absentia, there is little there, but pretty good. If the price does not suit - well, do not buy, as there are other options. There are no rules by which the price of certain cameras should be determined. The price of Panasonic S is also high, well, nothing can be done about it. Until a certain moment I thought that the mikra was an expensive system, until I decided to calculate how much a similar set on Nikon Z5 / 6 would cost me. : D Yes, these are slightly different things, a lot of nuances, but still.

        Reply

      • Michael
        09.12.2020

        I had it) And when “I don’t want a whale” starts, you turn into a collector. Looked at it all and gave it away.

        Reply

      • Sergei
        10.12.2020

        Ah, got it. I've been looking for a super-broad on the micra and something is somehow expensive and it seems like this money is not worth it. But I looked at FF and the situation there, in general, is not better. Just for $ 1100, which costs a panaleyka 8-18, you can take a used FF with super-wide, although it will also not be very convenient to keep a separate system for only two subjects - landscape and astro-landscape. And on the main system, the landscape will be limited to 24mm EGF. And you won't be able to shoot lightning at a wide angle either ... In general, this is such a painful choice. : D Everywhere has its limitations. If only Sigma could fit into ultra-wide zooms under a micro ...

        Reply

      • Pokemon
        07.12.2020

        I recommend to all well-wishers who sincerely tear their vest on themselves about the longevity of a double-crop, gather their strength, take eggs into a fist, and go and buy the following soup set:
        Olympus OM-D E-M1X
        Panasonic Lumix GH5
        Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark III
        some of this, yeah, and glass to the heap:
        Olympus ED 12-40mm f / 2.8 Pro
        Panasonic 12-35mm f / 2.8 II ASPH. OIS Lumix GX Vario
        It's very hard to worry about your favorite brand just sitting on the couch.
        We need to support her $$$.

        Reply

      • Victor
        07.12.2020

        12-40 pop.

        It is imperative that a supertele from that topic and some 10-25 / 1.7 drink to the heap.
        This will be a serious approach.

        Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        07.12.2020

        Elmarit 200 / 2.8 or Zuiko 300/4 for micra is much more expensive :)

        Reply

      • Yevgeniy
        08.12.2020

        As soon as the money appears, I will definitely buy 10-25 / 1.7 and 40-150 / 2.8. And more cameras ... most likely E-M1 Mark II and G9 or GH5.
        Although, I have enough GF1 and G5, to be honest. I do not shoot any sports (although there was such a thing, and it worked quite well), and there is no cinema either in the future.

        Reply

      • Sergei
        09.12.2020

        You have a strange set of components duplicating each other.
        Well, I just went and bought an e-m1 mark III not so long ago, soon I'll go buy the missing glasses. : D
        And judging from the context, it is not clear why buy Hashik and 12-35? You need to buy what you need, and not to “give money” to someone there ...

        Reply

      • Pokemon
        09.12.2020

        So I wrote about something.
        God help, invest further.

        Reply

    • B. R. P.
      08.12.2020

      Ricoh Pentax already bought once, yeah.

      Reply

  4. Paul
    07.12.2020

    Judging by the review, with the first version, there is no point in buying this lens: optically they are the same, and with a little addition, you can buy a used Olympus 45 / 1.8, which will be even better optically. In the first version, at short focusing distances, I noticed a slight shift to the front focus (which is noteworthy, the Yi 45 / 1.8 has a slight shift to the back focus), naturally, as the distance to the subject of photography increases, the depth of field increases and there is no big problem in this, and more the first version has some "oddities" in the focusing system when installed on Olympus OM-D devices of the younger line (10, 10ll in electronic shutter mode): return to a certain point after each shot. I wonder how this is the case with this lens. About the hood: in terms of thread and size, the hood from Jupiter-37a is perfect for this lens, it is deep enough and does not create vignetting.

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      07.12.2020

      Thanks. Here are just the original hood from the Yu-37, metal and heavy

      Reply

      • Paul
        07.12.2020

        Included with Jupiter-37a were 2 types of blends (perhaps there were some other options, I have 3 of the same out of 2): a plastic “one-sided” (attached only in the working position) and a metal “two-sided” (screwed not only in working, but also in the "transport" position). And the weight of the metal hood is not very large.

        Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        07.12.2020

        Thank you, I didn’t know that there were plastic hoods under the Ju-37

        Reply

      • Paul
        07.12.2020

        Here are both options:

        Reply

      • Oleg
        07.12.2020

        Mine is 84 with plastic one-sided. They suspect that the “younger” ones are all with this.

        Reply

    • Yevgeniy
      08.12.2020

      There are enough blends with such a thread for aliexpress. Metallic. Lungs. I took it, but I'm not using it. Stopped at the transition ring 52-30.

      Reply

    • Neo
      08.12.2020

      Native Panas has never seen cheaper than $ 200-250, the same 70 bucks were on Black Friday, 3-4 times cheaper

      Reply

  5. Yevgeniy
    08.12.2020

    Thanks. The switch looks human, but not as convenient as it seems to me :)
    I am glad that the huge Yongnuo inscription around the front lens was not painted over with white, but it flares very reliably, although it is unlikely to be as noticeable as in the first version (I put the adapter ring 52-30 and calmed down, it looks very extravagant). As for the rest, it seems to me that nothing has changed. Engine noise doesn't bother me at all, although it's clear what could be done better. The picture on the open one in the center was very sharp and remained. In general, anyone who has not bought can choose anyone who looks more like it, I think. And the owners of the first version don't need to worry at all.

    Reply

  6. Sergei
    09.12.2020

    Personally, I would refrain from buying such glasses. Well, unless you bought a secondary camera there for $ 40, but you didn't find the same lens for some reason. For those who can afford modern carcasses, I think it is better to take a native cheap portrait, well, or by paying a little extra Sigma 56mm f1.4, on a secondary or new one.

    Reply

    • Oleg
      09.12.2020

      Native with about the same focal times 3-3.5 more expensive. Used sigma too. Not everyone is amused that they "can afford", many just love to take pictures)).

      Reply

      • Sergei
        09.12.2020

        Well, I talked a lot with Chinese products and in general I can only recommend avoiding them almost always, if possible. It is also known that the miser pays twice.
        You can love taking pictures with any technique. Simply, the quality of the photographing process may depend on the quality of technology. Maybe the lens will dull or will not work for long. And maybe everything will be OK, but personally I do not want to risk it.

        Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        09.12.2020

        I used all the lenses from Yongnuo (except the new 35/2 under bzk), with some of them I got 50.000 frames. I can say with confidence that each model is special, there are very successful ones, there are very unsuccessful ones. The breakage happened only once with the model 50 / 1.4 for Nikon, which I sold, it broke already from the new owner and was repaired for about $ 20. I ran about 5000 frames. Some lenses gave me a lot of positives (100/2 under Nikon, 35 / 1.4 under Kenon), from some lenses (85 / 1.8 under Nikon). Under the bzk there are 42.5, 45.2 ii, 50 / 1.8, 85 / 1.8 are very successful, 85 / 1.8 will be reviewed soon, just the holy grail for $ 200. For advanced hobbyists, these are very interesting solutions. The negative for Yongnuo mainly comes from the breaking 50 1.8 under Nikon and Kenon. These were their first lenses, which were mechanically not very successful. Their new solutions are head and shoulders above. For example, 50.000 shots is roughly two years of shooting for an amateur photographer. There are a lot of subtleties here, and it's not so easy to say something about modern Chinese solutions.

        Reply

      • Sergei
        09.12.2020

        Yongnuo personally did not hold it in his hands, but even from the photographs one can see the cheapness and some luridness of their manufacture. I also do not presume to assert something for sure, but personally I would not contact without an urgent need. On the positive side, it can be noted that they practically do not use special elements in optical circuits, which means that there will be no “onion rings” in the circles of confusion, which seem to be associated with the presence of aspherical lenses in optics.

        So I have two Sigmas on the mic - 30mm and 16mm f1.4, so I'm thinking of buying another 56mm. On Nikon it was 10-20 sigma, I don't remember any special problems. But all ee third-party glass for Canicons with closed specifications and for an open micra is a little different. Although Yangnuo managed to achieve incompatibility and jambs on an open mount, judging by the comments.

        It is clear that now almost everything is done in China, but there are two big differences between what the Chinese do themselves and what they do under the strict control of global brands.

        PS Notifications about replies from your site do not come, to gmail com too.

        Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        09.12.2020

        Well, here are 2 units of glass, not all originals have something like that. You don't need to go far - analogues 85 1.8g Nikon, 85 1.8 Usm Canon without special elements. Panasonic 42.5 / 1.7 has one aspheric in total. Everything is very relative. I, too, was once skeptical of the yongs, especially the 42.5 of the first version, in a review in personal experience I also wrote that at first it seems like a toy. But this is exactly up to the moment of viewing photos on a computer.

        Reply

      • Yevgeniy
        09.12.2020

        I can say that the Chinese Godox is vastly superior to the American PocketWizard in its main function: remotely igniting flashes. I would stay away from the American PocketWizard. And even a flash from Canon once bathed in an American store turned out to be buggy (regardless of the settings, it always hammered to maximum). So just say that Chinese is worse only because of its Chineseness ... well, you must have been in hibernation for twenty years. I have no other explanation.

        Reply

      • Sergei
        10.12.2020

        Perhaps there are always some particulars. I have a Yongnuo flash and a smart synchronizer for Nikon, which can remotely twist the puff settings. I have zero questions for this set, although maybe because I have used it twice in the last five years, since Olympus bought it. Even with the flash of this retractable reflector, it is difficult to pull out, you have to use a coin, either the marriage or the quality is like that.
        I also have a Chinese tripod with an Alik and nothing like that for 50 bucks, without enthusiasm of course. I also rarely use it, only for astro, in other cases the stub saves. If I were buying a tripod now, I would not buy one.

        Reply

  7. Alexander
    21.01.2021

    Hello everybody. Who has not tried it on the OM-D E-M10 Mark II? Is autofocus working or not?

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      21.01.2021

      Most likely no one will tell you. I suppose it should work.

      Reply

      • Alexander
        21.01.2021

        Thank you. It's a pity it's over. It's just that a person has experience with the first version. Did not work.

        Reply

  8. Arkady Shapoval
    18.03.2021

    It so happened that I had the opportunity to use all Yongnuo lenses. Added YouTube videos for all Yongnuo lenses (generations, lineups, etc.) https://youtu.be/AfQ76sAwIac

    Reply

  9. Eugene
    29.09.2021

    It also works with G5 and GF1, although this is the first version.

    Reply

  10. Alexy
    14.11.2021

    Arkady, in this fragment “on the old Panasonic GF2 it works perfectly, but on the Panasonic G2 it is not recognized” both links are the same on the G2.

    Reply

    • Alexy
      14.11.2021

      Someone tried the thread on the E-M1, does it work?

      Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      14.11.2021

      Fixed

      Reply

      • Vsevolod
        05.10.2022

        Not sure if lumix dmc g3 will run?

        Reply

  11. Vsevolod
    05.10.2022

    Hello. Does anyone know if it will run on lumix dmc g3?

    Reply

Reply

 

 

Top
mobility. computer