Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Non Rangefinder Cameras > CSC : Digital Compact System Cameras - > Micro 4/3 Cameras

Micro 4/3 Cameras This forum is for all Micro 4/3 cameras of any camera make.

View Poll Results: Have you tried a u4/3 system?
no, and don't plan to 47 11.22%
yes, and use it regularly 209 49.88%
yes, but it didn't meet my needs 51 12.17%
no, but am interested in possibly checking it out someday 112 26.73%
Voters: 419. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes

Have you tried the u4/3 system out?
Old 08-08-2010   #1
ampguy
Registered User
 
ampguy's Avatar
 
ampguy is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7,053
Have you tried the u4/3 system out?

Please post your replies and suggestions you might have for those who haven't tried u4/3, but may be interested in it.
__________________
My photo blog

  Reply With Quote

Old 08-08-2010   #2
RichC
Registered User
 
RichC is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Brighton, UK
Posts: 898
Sensor's too small = furry pics and enormously long focal lengths. More interested in the APS variants like the Sony (or, rather, the pro versions which will come along eventually - the current Sony interfaces are awful).
__________________

-=Rich=-


Portfolio: www.richcutler.co.uk
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-08-2010   #3
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
 
semilog's Avatar
 
semilog is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,719
Let's start here: http://xkcd.com/386/

Quote:
Originally Posted by RichC View Post
Sensor's too small = furry pics and enormously long focal lengths. More interested in the APS variants like the Sony (or, rather, the pro versions which will come along eventually - the current Sony interfaces are awful).
Piffle. Sensor's ~20% less tall than Nikon APS-C. The difference with Canon APS-C is even smaller.

In the real world? Here's a comparison of the actual system resolution for two superb lenses: Olympus 50/2 macro on a 4/3 sensor (Panasonic L10), and Canon L IS USM 100/2.8 macro on an APS-C sensor (Canon 50D).

Both lenses are among the best available, so they should tell us something about the resolution of the sensors in these systems. And the answer is...

They're the same.

Well, not quite the same. The 4/3 setup, at its optimum, does just a hair better than the Canon, despite the Canon's being tested on a 15 vs. 10 megapixel sensor. Identical sensors are used in 4/3 and micro 4/3 cameras, so the comparison is valid.

__________________
There are two kinds of photographers:
those who are interested in what a particular camera can't do,
and those who are interested in what it can do.

semilog.smugmug.com | flickr.com/photos/semilog/

Last edited by semilog : 08-08-2010 at 20:21.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-08-2010   #4
Atto
Registered User
 
Atto's Avatar
 
Atto is offline
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Buenos Aires - Argentina
Age: 37
Posts: 91
What can I say about my GF1? wonderful. I've sold my Canon 40D (in which I've used 3 Carl Zeiss including Planar 85mm ƒ1.4, 24-70L, 50 ƒ1.4, Tokina 116, among many other lenses).
The GF1 with pancake 20mm is amazingly portable, and results are not as good as Canon 40D, but between ISO 100 and 800 make it very well.

Nowadays I am using it with 20mm pancake, 14-45 incredible good for a 'kit lens', three c-mount Bolex lenses, two Konica AR lenses.

During these days they will introduce an 14mm ƒ2.5 and another focal fixed ultra fast lens.
__________________
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-08-2010   #5
Darshan
Registered User
 
Darshan's Avatar
 
Darshan is offline
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 795
use GF1+20 mm regularly. haven't yet acquired any other lens as this combo more than meets my requirements.

+highly portable, fits in my shorts
+image quality excellent (for my needs)

-don't shoot above ISO 1000
-focus speed very slightly low than my DSLR (very slightly means just barely, not readily noticable but i can feel it while hunting my kids )

consequence: i am selling my DSLR gear.

cheers,
dan.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-08-2010   #6
achi4
Registered User
 
achi4 is offline
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 52
Amazingly good results with 20mm, 14-45 and 7-14 on GF1
Recently printed architectural photographs using the 7-14 at A2 size with amazing results.
Same building I have shot for years using different camera's (M6 with 21 mm asph, M8 with WATE and Rolleiflex Wide) so I know what quality can be achieved.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-08-2010   #7
ampguy
Registered User
 
ampguy's Avatar
 
ampguy is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7,053
The area of a Canon APS-C (20D for example) is 28% larger than a u4/3 sensor.

I think the same things that apply from APS-C to FF apply to u4/3 to APS-C, like this stuff:

http://www.bobatkins.com/photography..._vs_aps-c.html

Check it out!
__________________
My photo blog

  Reply With Quote

Old 08-08-2010   #8
ampguy
Registered User
 
ampguy's Avatar
 
ampguy is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7,053
Thanks Atto, Dan, and Achi -

So it seems that on the wide side, it's best to use the native 4/3 lens, and not MF adapted lens?

Is anyone using Micro 4/3 specifically for a compact long tele system?
__________________
My photo blog

  Reply With Quote

Old 08-08-2010   #9
wray
Registered User
 
wray's Avatar
 
wray is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Riverside, California
Posts: 644
This is the symbol for micro, μ. A lower case u is acceptable in its place.
__________________
Be yourself. Everyone else is taken. - Oscar Wilde
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-08-2010   #10
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
 
semilog's Avatar
 
semilog is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,719
Quote:
Originally Posted by ampguy View Post
The area of a Canon APS-C (20D for example) is 28% larger than a u4/3 sensor.

I think the same things that apply from APS-C to FF apply to u4/3 to APS-C, like this stuff:

http://www.bobatkins.com/photography..._vs_aps-c.html

Check it out!
The jump in both linear resolution and sensor area from APS-C to FF is a whole lot bigger than the jump from 4/3 to APS-C. See the diagram that I posted above.

If a 12 megapixel APS-C camera gives you adequate IQ, so will a 12 megapixel 4/3 or m4/3.

If resolution is actually a limiting factor in your photography, don't mess around. Just get a FF or MF camera. Same goes for low light.
__________________
There are two kinds of photographers:
those who are interested in what a particular camera can't do,
and those who are interested in what it can do.

semilog.smugmug.com | flickr.com/photos/semilog/

Last edited by semilog : 08-08-2010 at 13:48.
  Reply With Quote

hai
Old 08-08-2010   #11
ampguy
Registered User
 
ampguy's Avatar
 
ampguy is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7,053
hai

wakkatta, so desu ne!!

(I agree!)

Quote:
Originally Posted by semilog View Post
The jump in both linear resolution and sensor area from APS-C to FF is a whole lot bigger than the jump from 4/3 to APS-C. See the diagram that I posted above.
__________________
My photo blog

  Reply With Quote

Old 08-08-2010   #12
DNG
Fuji X-E2/XF18,XF35
 
DNG's Avatar
 
DNG is offline
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Camby, Indiana. USA
Age: 60
Posts: 2,700
More than sensor size.....
It can mount any others brand lens, and the glass is 80% of the IQ IMO.

Sure many want High ISO (1600+) super clean... Than, buy a FF DSLR and quit complaining about smaller than FF sensors.

For a bunch of us hobbyist, ISO 1600+ are rarely used anyway.

The m43 has a very strong following with RF users that want an option to use their glass on a Digital without spending $1,400 to $8,000 on a DRF.

I, personally, may switch over to just a Film RF and a m43 digital... I'll have to see what wide angle primes are coming. The 12mm seams like a go.. but, at what price point? I will get rid of my DSLR if an affordable 12mm comes out. Than, I'd get the 12mm, 25mm and have a nice kit. + I have a great 50mm f/1.5 that I can use as a macro with my extension tubes or have a great fast portrait lens without them.

I have a 70-300 Sigma APO, that I have not used since I bought it new. So, I don't need long lenses apparently.

That's my take. A great system camera for multiple brand users or by themselves too.

@ampguy
I plan to buy a lens in the 90-135 range for fast telephoto.. My ZM 50 f/1.5 C-Sonnar is a superb portrait lens on a m43 body.
I may get a UWZ, don't know yet, a 12mm is as wide as I like right now. I have CV 25mm Snapshot now for the film RF. It is just OK on a m43 though... adapted lenses from 35mm and longer work best on m43 from my tests.
__________________
Feedback Link

Last edited by DNG : 08-08-2010 at 14:29.
  Reply With Quote

Thanks
Old 08-08-2010   #13
ampguy
Registered User
 
ampguy's Avatar
 
ampguy is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7,053
Thanks

I was thinking more of 200-300 lens on a 4/3 to get into a compact setup for distant wildlife and birds. Probably would benefit from one of the bodies with IS on it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DNG View Post
More than sensor size.....
It can mount any others brand lens, and the glass is 80% of the IQ IMO.

Sure many want High ISO (1600+) super clean... Than, buy a FF DSLR and quit complaining about smaller than FF sensors.

For a bunch of us hobbyist, ISO 1600+ are rarely used anyway.

The m43 has a very strong following with RF users that want an option to use their glass on a Digital without spending $1,400 to $8,000 on a DRF.

I, personally, may switch over to just a Film RF and a m43 digital... I'll have to see what wide angle primes are coming. The 12mm seams like a go.. but, at what price point? I will get rid of my DSLR if an affordable 12mm comes out. Than, I'd get the 12mm, 25mm and have a nice kit. + I have a great 50mm f/1.5 that I can use as a macro with my extension tubes or have a great fast portrait lens without them.

I have a 70-300 Sigma APO, that I have not used since I bought it new. So, I don't need long lenses apparently.

That's my take. A great system camera for multiple brand users or by themselves too.

@ampguy
I plan to buy a lens in the 90-135 range for fast telephoto.. My ZM 50 f/1.5 C-Sonnar is a superb portrait lens on a m43 body.
I may get a UWZ, don't know yet, a 12mm is as wide as I like right now. I have CV 25mm Snapshot now for the film RF. It is just OK on a m43 though... adapted lenses from 35mm and longer work best on m43 from my tests.
__________________
My photo blog

  Reply With Quote

Old 08-08-2010   #14
DNG
Fuji X-E2/XF18,XF35
 
DNG's Avatar
 
DNG is offline
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Camby, Indiana. USA
Age: 60
Posts: 2,700
Quote:
Originally Posted by ampguy View Post
I was thinking more of 200-300 lens on a 4/3 to get into a compact setup for distant wildlife and birds. Probably would benefit from one of the bodies with IS on it.
Don't see why not....
Canon FD may be the cheapest long teles At KEH, they have an FD 300 f/5.6 Florite for $425.00 EX, and they have an FD 200's f/2.8 that is a mere $200.00 in EX, f/2.8 is a lot better for MF longer lenses.
__________________
Feedback Link
  Reply With Quote

have some teles
Old 08-08-2010   #15
ampguy
Registered User
 
ampguy's Avatar
 
ampguy is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7,053
have some teles

The lenses I'd like to try first would be the ones I have in Nikon F mount, the 12 element 80-200 zoom, and a Sigma 70-300. These work well with a D40x, but the long ends can really use a tripod.

Will be interesting to see how effective the IS really is in say the Oly EP2 or EPl1.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DNG View Post
Don't see why not....
Canon FD may be the cheapest long teles At KEH, they have an FD 300 f/5.6 Florite for $425.00 EX, and they have an FD 200's f/2.8 that is a mere $200.00 in EX, f/2.8 is a lot better for MF longer lenses.
__________________
My photo blog

  Reply With Quote

Old 08-08-2010   #16
willie_901
Registered User
 
willie_901's Avatar
 
willie_901 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,904
The image quality with my G1 and Lumix 20/1.7 is fine. The kit zoom lens is nice too, but it is very slow. The increased DOF is both a blessing and a curse. If you are really into subject isolation, I doubt you will enjoy micro-4/3. One exception is close ups. But when the subject is 6-8 feet away, isolation suffers. Also all the inherent perspective distortion issues with wide-angle-of-view lenses are more annoying with the smaller format sensor. In Lightroom the LUMIX lens correction data tables correct barrel/pin cushion distortion quite nicely and CA is also well controlled.

I mostly use manual focus and bracketed aperture priority metering. The EVF lag is not an issue for me. I did some family action photos. I bracketed these as well, but kept the exposure constant. Again, this worked fine for dealing with action in simple family snap shots. I would never use this camera for serious action photography.

I shoot in RAW and process the images in Lightroom. The LUMIX images are about 90% as good as my D200 and about half as good as my D300 RAW images. By good I mean noise, shadow details and dynamic range. I think at ISO 800 the images look fine as B&W photos. But I abandoned pixel peeping to concentrate on emotional and visual impact a while back... so I am not very fussy.

I bought some lens adapters, but while messing around with legacy lenses is fun, I did not find it useful or cost effective for my work. I would just stick with micro-4/3 lens.

In my mind the LUMIX G1 with a 20/1.7 is essentially a 21st century Canonet QL-17... and that's how I use this camera.
__________________
"Perspective is governed by where you stand – object size and the angle of view included in the picture is determined by focal length." H.S. Newcombe

Self-Induced Transparency Photography, FLICKR, Professional Portfolio.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-08-2010   #17
scottwallick
ambition ≥ skill
 
scottwallick's Avatar
 
scottwallick is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Woodside, N.Y., USA
Age: 36
Posts: 593
Love my GF1. Had an E-P1 too, though I let that one slide. I really like the Lumix G 20mm f/1.7. I have high hopes for the upcoming Lumix G 14mm f/2.5. Should be fun. Plus, I'm considering (one day) picking up the Lumix G 45mm f/2.8. There are just a few native MFT primes, so I'm hoping for more.
__________________
—Scott ⋅ SITEFLICKR
Fujifilm X100S
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-08-2010   #18
retnull
Registered User
 
retnull is offline
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 466
Very happy with the GH-1. Very good IQ and ergonomics.

It is also a lens geek's delight -- the camera will mount pretty much anything at all (with adapters). Adapted lenses shorter than 35mm is iffy, but longer can work out extremely well. It's been fascinating to experiment with cheap lenses that I never would have encountered otherwise.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-08-2010   #19
gavinlg
Registered User
 
gavinlg's Avatar
 
gavinlg is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Melbourne VIC
Posts: 4,779
I've used an e-p1 and liked it.

Once they release some f1.4 and faster native lenses I'll buy into it bigger. The best thing about m4/3 is the ability to have tiny superfast lenses that make up for the differences in sensor size. I want a 17mm f1.4, a 25mm f1.2 and a 12mm f1.8. If they made those I'd buy each one + a panasonic and olympus body.

Panasonic looks to have the right idea with lens speeds, olympus is kidding themselves. The 17mm f2.8 is the same size as the panasonic 20mm f1.7 and is optically worse. It doesn't make sense. If it had been a 17mm f2 it would have been so much better.

Last edited by gavinlg : 08-08-2010 at 21:00.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-08-2010   #20
ReeRay
Registered User
 
ReeRay is offline
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Hua Hin Thailand
Age: 68
Posts: 305
Use my GF-1 with 20mm pancake, 35, 45 and 90mm Zeiss G lenses. Nikon 50mm AI-s and Kern Switar 75mm f1.9. Perfect lightweight travel set-up with amazing IQ. Despite owning a 5D MKII and tons of L glass the GF-1 is the kit I invariably pick up.
  Reply With Quote

yeah
Old 08-08-2010   #21
ampguy
Registered User
 
ampguy's Avatar
 
ampguy is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7,053
yeah

But that 20/1.7 lens is about $400, or as much as an M-mount CV lens, or Rokkor 40/2, and 1/2 a Cron 35. If you have other M-mount bodies, is it really worth getting a dedicated 40ish FOV lens just for the AF and that body?

Quote:
Originally Posted by fdigital View Post
I've used an e-p1 and liked it.

Once they release some f1.4 and faster native lenses I'll buy into it bigger. The best thing about m4/3 is the ability to have tiny superfast lenses that make up for the differences in sensor size. I want a 17mm f1.4, a 25mm f1.2 and a 12mm f1.8. If they made those I'd buy each one + a panasonic and olympus body.

Panasonic looks to have the right idea with lens speeds, olympus is kidding themselves. The 17mm f2.8 is the same size as the panasonic 20mm f1.7 and is optically worse. It doesn't make sense. If it had been a 17mm f2 it would have been so much better.
__________________
My photo blog

  Reply With Quote

Old 08-08-2010   #22
Avotius
Monster Rancher
 
Avotius's Avatar
 
Avotius is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Chongqing, China
Posts: 3,440
I have an EP1, its an ok camera, nice for throwing in the bag for high quality snaps. My wife uses it more than I do now for just snaps and what not.

Originally I got the camera in hopes that it would be a digital option for my M lenses, it wasn't. So I bit the bullet and got an M8 instead.

The wife wants to get the 20mm f1.7 panasonic thing, she doesnt like zoom lenses, and likes 50's with big apertures....I taught her well
__________________
Flickr.

Last edited by Avotius : 08-08-2010 at 21:43.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-08-2010   #23
JohnnyT
Registered User
 
JohnnyT is offline
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Montreal
Posts: 131
I actually wanted to buy a u3/4 to make a street photography project but ended with a Canon instead... The video from the u3/4 are not enough good and I wanted to also do some pro work with it... Finally, I love it... Ability to use Zeiss lenses.... The sensor is big... Even if it is 20% bigger... It make the difference in the DOF and the noise ratio... Now I have a "cheap" camera that have the DOF of the film Super35mm ! Yay!

But I must say that I would like to have a small killer to make some more stealth shots... Pany or Pen? That is the question...
__________________
I always wished to be invisible...

http://jonathantremblay.carbonmade.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-08-2010   #24
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
 
semilog's Avatar
 
semilog is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,719
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyT View Post
I actually wanted to buy a u3/4 to make a street photography project but ended with a Canon instead... The video from the u3/4 are not enough good and I wanted to also do some pro work with it... Finally, I love it... Ability to use Zeiss lenses.... The sensor is big... Even if it is 20% bigger... It make the difference in the DOF and the noise ratio...
Re. low light performance:

The pixel pitch on the Canon 7D is 4.3 µm -- identical to the 4/3 format Pentax G1, which also has a pixel size of 4.3 µm.

What this in turn tells us is that Panasonic is lagging Sony and Canon by about half a generation in sensor tech. This is probably due largely to gapless microlens tech, which Sony and Canon have deployed in their latest sensors. The next generation of Panasonic sensors (and thus Pana and Oly 4/3 and µ4/3 cameras) is also supposed to contain next-generation microlens technology. I assume that the newer Samsung sensors will, as well.
__________________
There are two kinds of photographers:
those who are interested in what a particular camera can't do,
and those who are interested in what it can do.

semilog.smugmug.com | flickr.com/photos/semilog/
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-08-2010   #25
skibeerr
Home and away.
 
skibeerr's Avatar
 
skibeerr is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Melbourne Vic
Posts: 902
I just got an E-30 with the 14-54mm 2.8/3.5ii as my first DSLR, until now I only used film.

It is more than good enough for the purpose I bought it for. I would have liked micro four thirds, smaller etc, but the lack of an optical VF was a dealbreaker for me.

Just for the record my ideal camera would be a digital Konica Hexar af. Imagine a
Leica X1 with a viewfinder like the Hexar af.

Guess I will have to hurry and order a Razzle dog.
We are dwarfs on the shoulders of giants.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 21:21.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.