Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Digital Cameras > Micro 4/3 Cameras Olympus Panasonic

Micro 4/3 Cameras Olympus Panasonic 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 Search this Thread 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: 7,043
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: 1,007
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: 3,734
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 19:21.
  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: 39
Posts: 90
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: 902
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: 7,043
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: 7,043
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: 629
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: 3,734
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 12:48.
  Reply With Quote

hai
Old 08-08-2010   #11
ampguy
Registered User
 
ampguy's Avatar
 
ampguy is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7,043
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
Film Friendly
 
DNG's Avatar
 
DNG is offline
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Camby, Indiana. USA
Age: 62
Posts: 2,925
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
Flickr: My Street

Last edited by DNG : 08-08-2010 at 13:29.
  Reply With Quote

Thanks
Old 08-08-2010   #13
ampguy
Registered User
 
ampguy's Avatar
 
ampguy is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7,043
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
Film Friendly
 
DNG's Avatar
 
DNG is offline
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Camby, Indiana. USA
Age: 62
Posts: 2,925
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
Flickr: My Street
  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: 7,043
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 online now
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 3,959
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

williamchuttonjr.com, FLICKR,
  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: 38
Posts: 586
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: 465
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: 4,816
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.
__________________
http://nopraise.tumblr.com/

Last edited by gavinlg : 08-08-2010 at 20:00.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-08-2010   #20
ReeRay
Registered User
 
ReeRay is offline
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Chonburi Thailand
Age: 70
Posts: 316
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: 7,043
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
Some guy
 
Avotius's Avatar
 
Avotius is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 3,496
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 20:43.
  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: 3,734
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
Registered User
 
skibeerr's Avatar
 
skibeerr is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Melbourne Vic
Age: 54
Posts: 1,016
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

Old 08-08-2010   #26
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
 
semilog's Avatar
 
semilog is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,734
Quote:
Originally Posted by skibeerr View Post
I just got an E-30 with the 14-54mm 2.8/3.5ii as my first DSLR, until now I only used film.
Nice camera, that. Good review and reference for the E-30 and the 14-54 here, if you haven't already found it.
__________________
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 08-09-2010   #27
thegman
Registered User
 
thegman is offline
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Age: 36
Posts: 3,826
My brother had a GF-1, I never really got the hang of it, although now he's replaced it with a Sony NEX, and for all the stick it gets for the user interface, I find it easier than the GF-1, especially if you shoot Aperture Priority, which we both do.
__________________
My Blog
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-09-2010   #28
Dogman
Registered User
 
Dogman is offline
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 321
I started shooting digital with a Canon 30D but found a Canon G10 more useful to me for general shooting and the quality was more than acceptable, excellent at lower ISOs. Along comes Fourthirds, small in physical size with a sensor bigger than the G10 and a lens mount standard that could adapt wide ranges and brands of lenses. What was there not to like? I've been using an E-P1 and, so far, it is working out nicely.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-09-2010   #29
sfaust
Registered User
 
sfaust's Avatar
 
sfaust is offline
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 509
My needs for the micro 4/3 were simply to have a compact camera to augment my DSLR for the times I don't want to carry it but still want quality images. It works perfectly for that.

I have the E-P2 / EVF and mainly use it with the Pannasonic 20mm 1.7 in manual focus with the AF/AL button used to pre-set the focus as needed. It works great in this configuration and very responsive. I like the ability to use the EVF and physically longer lenses when size isn't an issue, but then remove the EVF and put the pancake 20mm 1.7 on for a very compact setup.

The quality is more than adequate for up to 8x10 and 11x14 images. I wouldn't use it professionally, since I do shoot images that are occasionally are used on billboards, huge posters, etc, and its just not setup for that environment. But for most of my personal shooting its more than adequate.

I'm not sure where the 'enormously long focal lengths' comment comes from. The 35mm equivalent of 14mm and up doesn't seem long to me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by willie_901 View Post
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 find that shallow depth of field is easily controllable if fast lenses are used. I get very nice results when I use the 20mm 1.7 wide open, and have posted several results of non-closeup images with very pleasing DOF. I also use some legacy lenses, such as a 50mm 1.5 and 75mm 2.5 and also get nice soft backgrounds when shooting wide open and full length portraits. The key is the fast aperture since as soon as you start approaching f2.8 and beyond, the DOF starts getting pretty deep. One wide angles, even if past, shallow depth of field its beyond the 4/3 sensors capability (unless someone comes out with a f0.5 wide angle .

Quote:
Originally Posted by willie_901 View Post
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.
That's exactly what I was looking for when I went to replace my Canon G10. I think you summed it up perfectly!
__________________
Stephen
www.StephenFaust.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-09-2010   #30
willie_901
Registered User
 
willie_901's Avatar
 
willie_901 is online now
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 3,959
Quote:
Originally Posted by ampguy View Post
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?
Yes, it is. The corrected image quality is excellent and manual focusing is so wonderfully accurate and fast. The lens size and weight provide value as well.

Micro 4/3 really is a system. M lenses obviously work and many people happily use them on Micro 4/3 bodies. But I found non-system lenses to be inconvenient and often the IQ suffers at 20 mm M focal lengths. The physics behind the loss of edge sharpness at short M focal lengths is discussed at length at in all the dedicated micro-4/3 forums.
__________________
"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

williamchuttonjr.com, FLICKR,

Last edited by willie_901 : 08-09-2010 at 20:43.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-09-2010   #31
retnull
Registered User
 
retnull is offline
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 465
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...
The "hacked" GH-1 produces stellar video. Some say better than Canon 7D: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1BMugSQl1I
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-09-2010   #32
seakayaker1
Registered User
 
seakayaker1's Avatar
 
seakayaker1 is offline
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 1,872
Bought the GF1 with the Panasonic 20/1.7 back in March and love the versatility of having a camera that fit in a coat pocket, great for street photography, and low light. The Panasonic Lumix 7-14/4 along with the Leica D 14-50/3.8-5.6 four/thirds lens are two great AF lens that compliment the 20/1.7.

I have also purchased a number of MF lenses since then on the used market and a few new ones along the way. Picked up four Leitz lens, 50/2 (1951); 35/3.5 (1953); 90/4 (1954); and 135/4.5 (1960) and have captured some great shots with them on the GF1.

The Voigtlander 40/1.4 (M); 50/1.5 (LTM); & 75/2.5 (LTM) are wonderful lens and deliver a lot of bang for the money spent for them.

The Contax G Zeiss 45/2 & 90/2.8 are incredibly sharp lens and produce great photos.

As someone who uses photography as a hobby and enjoyment the 4/3rds delivers a lot of bang for the buck and a ton of fun.

I enjoy the photos displayed here on this forum and over at GETdpi.com micro 4/3rd sections. It does appear that a lot of people who use them are enjoying their experiences.

When the time comes and I move on to something else, I will sell of the equipment. Whatever the difference between what I paid and what I recapture is the money spend on having a good time. It is going to be some time before I am ready to move on . . . . .

. . . . . thank goodness there are choices, we all can be happy!

Life is Grand!

Dan
~
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-09-2010   #33
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
 
semilog's Avatar
 
semilog is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,734
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...
First, read this.

Then, watch this.

Then, you are permitted to weep.

(Nota bene: I am not trying to say in these posts that 4/3 cameras are so fantastically great. I am trying to point out that the differences between 4/3 and APS-C are much, much smaller than many people think.)
__________________
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 : 08-09-2010 at 23:30.
  Reply With Quote

huh?
Old 08-09-2010   #34
ampguy
Registered User
 
ampguy's Avatar
 
ampguy is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7,043
huh?

links appear to be the same.

Quote:
Originally Posted by semilog View Post
First, read this.

Then, watch this.

Then, you are permitted to weep.

(Nota bene: I am not trying to say in these posts that 4/3 cameras are so fantastically great. I am trying to point out that the differences between 4/3 and APS-C are much, much smaller than many people think.)
__________________
My photo blog

  Reply With Quote

Old 08-09-2010   #35
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
 
semilog's Avatar
 
semilog is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,734
Quote:
Originally Posted by ampguy View Post
links appear to be the same.
Whoopsie! Fixed.
__________________
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 08-16-2010   #36
Dave Jenkins
Loose Canon
 
Dave Jenkins's Avatar
 
Dave Jenkins is offline
Join Date: May 2010
Location: The Beautiful Northwest Georgia Mountains
Posts: 538
I really like my E-PL1 as my out-and-about camera. Don't have the EVF yet, but hope to get one soon.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Horned Tree.jpg (79.7 KB, 30 views)
__________________
Dave Jenkins

My new book: Georgia: A Backroads Portrait http://blur.by/1gg1SMt
Architecture/Commercial: www.davidbjenkins.com
My best-selling book (28,000+ copies): Rock City Barns: A Passing Era
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-16-2010   #37
Warren T.
Registered User
 
Warren T.'s Avatar
 
Warren T. is offline
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Age: 58
Posts: 669
I bought into the m4/3 system because I wanted a compact, lightweight kit for travel. The more I use it, the more I like it. The native Lumix lenses are superb, and I also have the option of using all of my old 35mm lenses.

This shot was taken last weekend with my Lumix G1 and Micro-Nikkor 200mm f4 ai.

--Warren

__________________
My RFF Gallery
My Private Group Photoblog (we're looking for a few new members, PM me) www.fpcf.blogspot.com
My SF Photoblog: www.viewfindersf.aminus3.com
My web galleries site: www.viewfindersf.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-16-2010   #38
kevinparis
Registered User
 
kevinparis's Avatar
 
kevinparis is offline
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 54
used both 4/3 and micro4/3 - most fun I have had with cameras ever - great native lenses and all that legacy glass - its a better camera than a lot of photographers

e-p1 shots here

http://www.flickr.com/photos/kevinpa...7623249659358/

E-510 and E-p1 legacy glass shots here

http://www.flickr.com/photos/kevinpa...7622730407793/


K
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-16-2010   #39
tom.w.bn
Registered User
 
tom.w.bn is offline
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 2,422
voted "yes, but it didn't meet my needs". The use of leica lenses did sound promising, the crop factor of 2 made it useless for me. After the first enthusiasm I was disappointed more and more by the awful low light performance.
Right now between full frame dslr and film rangefinder there is no place for something else.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-16-2010   #40
Dave Jenkins
Loose Canon
 
Dave Jenkins's Avatar
 
Dave Jenkins is offline
Join Date: May 2010
Location: The Beautiful Northwest Georgia Mountains
Posts: 538
Warren, why does your photo display full size and mine only displays as a thumbnail?
I sized it at 600x600 pixels (since it is square) as per instructions. What am I doing wrong.?
__________________
Dave Jenkins

My new book: Georgia: A Backroads Portrait http://blur.by/1gg1SMt
Architecture/Commercial: www.davidbjenkins.com
My best-selling book (28,000+ copies): Rock City Barns: A Passing Era
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
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 07:01.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, 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.