Canon, Olympus and Panasonic Lens Tests on the Panasonic GH-1

Written by Gary on September 22nd, 2009

A few posts ago, I discussed results of my simplistic lens tests (photographing a lens resolution chart at variable distances according to effective lens focal length to keep chart size almost constant with careful live view magnified manual focus on tripod with self-timer).

I have now placed double-sized crops (ie. cropped the centre of the images and uploaded using PS to double the size of the image which equates to viewing these images at “200x” in PS and then compressed them to 29% jpeg compression) of these images on my website here so that you can get a better idea.

Most people do not like looking at photos of lens resolution charts, so if you fall into this category, then don’t look, just check out the photos I take with the lenses here instead.

The main conclusions of the tests were posted in these blogs:

In the previous post of the EF 85mm lens in action, Jeff commented on the purple fringing and whether it is sensor blooming rather than chromatic aberration given the absence of green fringing as well.

From the lens tests, the new ED glass lenses such as Canon L lenses and Olympus ZD 50-200mm lens had minimal if any purple fringing even wide open.

In comparison, older legacy lenses (even the EF 85mm f/1.8) with no ED glass showed much purple fringing but no green fringing wide open which tended to improve substantially as one stopped down.

Thus I suspect it is not sensor blooming per se that causes this but perhaps an interaction between the sensor microlenses and chromatic aberration or perhaps lack of telecentricity of the lenses which tends to be worse wide open.

I have older lens tests using the same technique here (but chart magnifications may not be identical to that above so may not be directly comparable):

 

Posted in lenses | Comments Off on Canon, Olympus and Panasonic Lens Tests on the Panasonic GH-1
Tags: , , , , ,

Panasonic GH-1 with Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 lens

Written by Gary on September 21st, 2009

The Panasonic GH-1 is designed for Micro Four Thirds lenses but can also use all the Four Thirds lenses – although many of these latter are manual focus.

One of the main reasons for buying into the Micro Four Thirds system instead of using a more compact point and shoot camera is the combination of image quality and versatility, in particular, the ability to achieve shallow depth of field with a range of wide aperture lenses.

Some of my favorite wide aperture lenses for nice medium telephoto shallow depth of field effect are the Four Thirds lenses such as the Olympus ZD 50mm f/2.0 macro and 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5 SWD lenses.

Unfortunately, both of these will only manual focus on the GH-1, and the 50-200mm is a bit too big for it.

I thus thought I would try out my Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 lens. Whilst this lens designed for Canon EOS dSLRs, it must be used at a fixed aperture on the MFT cameras via an adapter (although you can change this aperture by setting it on a Canon body then holding in DOF preview button as you remove it).

In reality this is not such a big problem as my main reason for using it is to get the wide aperture in a relatively compact lens. To get this sort of focal length/aperture in Four Thirds, you would have to resort to the very expensive, 1.8kg ZD 35-100mm f/2.0 lens – not really a nice size for the GH-1!

Of course, if you have a Nikon or Carl Zeiss 85mm f/1.4 or f/1.8 lenses and you would have full aperture control, but alas I do not have them.

The Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 is quite a nice size for the GH-1 given that it gives you 170mm focal length reach at f/1.8 and it is quite a sharp lens even wide open but it does have one big problem – purple fringing at wide aperture – this is a common problem on legacy film lenses in particular when used on digital cameras at apertures wider than f/2.8, but it is correctable in post-processing.

Here are a few quick shots on a recent trip into the city to show what you can do with this combo at f/1.8 with no post processing (click on image to enlarge):

bokeh and depth of field at f/1.8

street art

and now to demonstrate the purple fringing that occurs in high contrast junctions (click to see full image resized for web):

purple fringing.

It’s a great lens if used carefully wide open. You can reduce purple fringing by using f/2.8 instead of f/1.8 but you also lose a bit of your nice shallow depth of field.

It is not as good a lens optically as a Canon 135mm f/2.0L lens or an Olympus ZD 50-200mm lens, but it is much more compact, and very usable.

I wouldn’t go out and buy it just to use on Micro Four Thirds cameras, but given that there are many Canon users buying into MFT for a more compact solution with true AF video capability, this does become a very useful option for them as long as manual focus and fixed aperture will fit their needs.

 

Posted in lenses | 4 Responses »
Tags: , ,

More Micro Four Thirds lens adapters – now with aperture control rings

Written by Gary on September 12th, 2009

If you read my blog, you will no doubt not have missed that one of the reasons many people are buying Micro Four Thirds cameras, and the Olympus E-P1 in particular (for its built-in image stabiliser), is that this system is the MOST adaptable camera system ever made.

You can mount almost any lens ever made onto these cameras, albeit in manual focus mode only, but in the case of Olympus cameras, they become image stabilised – you just dial in the actual focal length of the lens and there you have it.

This creates a system with possibilities of endless fun an experimenting, and unlike most good AF lenses, you can but excellent legacy lenses very cheaply indeed, thus making it more cost effective if you can live with manual focus.

For example, you can pick up a beautiful Olympus OM 24mm f/2.8 lens and adapt it to these cameras for a nice walk-around 48mm focal length view lens, or get a super cheap Olympus OM/Nikon/Canon FD/Minolta/Leica R/Contax Carl Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 lens and it becomes a nice portrait lens without having to pay lots of money for an AF equivalent.

And if you want a very discrete telephoto, the OM 100mm f/2.8 gives focal length reach of a 200mm lens for a very compact image stabilised package with option of opening as wide as f/2.8 – although better at f/4. The OM 135mm f/3.5 lens is another very useful compact lens and becomes a 270mm image stabilised lens on an E-P1.

Here is my Olympus OM 100mm f/2.8 attached to an OM-EOS adapter, mounted on a EOS-MFT adapter, then onto my Panasonic GH-1 (I don’t yet have a OM-MFT adapter):

OM 100mm

If you want even smaller lenses, you can mount rangefinder lenses such as Leica M mount lenses or Olympus Pen lenses, or even cine camera lenses such as PL lenses.

One problem with the latest AF digital lenses from many of the manufacturers though is the lack of an aperture ring on the lens which until now has generally meant that you can only shoot these at wide open aperture (however, with Canon EOS lenses, you can do a trick to change the aperture by mounting the lens on a Canon body, selecting the desired aperture, hold DOF preview button in while you remove the lens – the aperture will stay at the selected aperture when you mount it on a Micro Four Thirds body).

Now Novoflex has come to the rescue and created new Micro Four Thirds adapters which incorporate an aperture control ring, thus you can now change the aperture of the new Nikon G lenses, Pentax K and Sony/Minolta lenses BUT not Canon EOS – yet.

The only problem with these adapters, is that they come at a price – RRP $US291 – ouch!

If you don’t need this functionality, you can search on Ebay for cheaper solutions – usually closer to $US80.

The Canon EOS lenses require an electronic solution, and although the video camera manufacturers have developed a aperture control solution for adapting Canon EOS EF lenses, we are still waiting for a similar solution for the Micro Four Thirds.

Finally, I am still waiting for an enterprising manufacturer to create a tilt-shift adapter for Micro Four Thirds which should be possible, and which would effectively convert all adapted lenses (even 35mm film camera lenses) into tilt-shift lenses – this is only possible on a Micro Four Thirds system due to its short lens to sensor distance, although similar adapters are available for Nikon and Canon dSLRs but you must resort to massive medium format or large format lenses to use them.

Fun times ahead!

See dpreview.com

ps… don’t forget, there is a little gotcha … The Panasonic GH-1 (and presumably other Panasonic cameras) will not allow AF-confirm adapters to work on a Four Thirds – Micro Four Thirds adapter: you will get a lens error message even though you have set the camera to shoot w/o lens!

ps… unlike on dSLRs, there is no AF-confirm functionality, but to offset this, there is a MUCH faster manual focus magnified assist system as there is no need to raise the mirror up to enter live view mode (because there is no mirror on Micro Four Thirds).

 

Posted in cameras | 2 Responses »
Tags:

Leica finally delivers – at a price – for the rest of us, it’s Micro Four Thirds all the way

Written by Gary on September 11th, 2009

Leica M film camera fanatics around the world have long been waiting for a true digital version of their much valued 35mm film interchangeable lens rangefinder cameras which were the mainstay of well-heeled street photographers of the 20th century.

The Leica M8 digital had to utilise a 1.3x crop sensor and inadequate IR filtration in order to deal with the optical problems posed by the very short lens mount to sensor distance of the Leica M lenses.

Now with the new Leica M9, it seems that Kodak have been able to overcome the issues and even do so with a full frame 35mm sensor which finally realises the potential of the much coveted Leica M lenses.

Although I am not a Leica camera user (I can only afford the Panasonic GH-1 and Leica-D 25mm f/1.4 lens), I come from a background of Olympus OM use and can appreciate the benefits of the Leica design when used as a candid camera.

I use my GH-1 in a similar way by combining it with an Olympus OM 21mm lens so I can set a focus and aperture without lifting the camera to my eye, and in shutter priority mode with auto-ISO know that I should be able to get the shot I need.

If all one wished to do is this, then Leica have their fixed lens option – the Leica X1 but at $US2000 – most people would get far more bang for their buck with the Micro Four Thirds system – see this blog.

Back to the Leica M9.

At 18mp, full frame, with no anti-alias filter to degrade the sharpness of the Leica M lenses, it becomes the smallest, lightest, full frame digital camera with interchangeable lenses and promises to be able to deliver high quality images – perhaps even better than current 20+ mp full frame dSLRs.

BUT, there is a BIG problem – the body will set you back $US6000, then you need to look at about $US3000 for a lens. Only a fanatic will pay that much for such a specialised camera – although it is a very nice camera system.

In addition, the lack of live view means there is no alternative to the rangefinder view, so you cannot get a through-the-lens view and this means that even if you could use other non-Leica-M mount lenses, you would not be able to focus with them. This of course will not be an issue with those who buy the M9 as they will already have their set of Leica M lenses and would not use anything else anyway.

This all brings us back to why so many people are excited by the Micro Four Thirds system – it brings for the first time, most of the benefits of the the Leica M world (no rangefinder version yet though) and combines them with features of the dSLR world as well as the digital video world, and all in a relatively affordable, compact and light package.

A GH-1 with 14-140mm HD lens sounded expensive at $US1599, but when you consider that the lens itself is worth more than half of this price, and the versatility this camera offers, it is really not a bad option.

More information on the Leica M9 at:

Oh, and it seems demand for the Leica M9 is high, even at that price with photographers trading in their big, heavy Canon 1DsMIII and Nikon D3’s – see here.

 

Posted in cameras | 7 Responses »
Tags: ,

Panasonic GH-1 at high ISO at an art gallery

Written by Gary on September 9th, 2009

Yesterday, I ventured to cold, wet, wintry Ballarat – a regional city in Victoria’s central highlands which is hosting an International Foto Biennale photographic exhibition.

I took most of my digital gear for the day’s outing including my Canon 1DMIII, Olympus E510 and my Panasonic GH-1, as I had hoped to do a bit of walking around and capture some of the nice mid-19th century gold rush architecture this town offers.

Unfortunately it rained nearly all day, and given the significant amount of walking I had to do to get from one venue to the next, I decided it would be safer if I left most of my gear in the car in case it became water damaged. I decided then just to take my Panasonic GH-1 with its 14-140mm HD kit lens, just in case I came across something interesting, like this wonderful little cottage with Hardenbergia violacea creeper in bloom:

Miners cottage

One of the venues was the very nice Ballarat Fine Art Gallery – a must for those visiting this region, and given the pouring rain outside, I took advantage of the time there to browse through their collection of Australian paintings.

Had I thought this might eventuate, I would have brought along a faster aperture lens instead of the f/5.6 on the kit lens, but nevertheless, I was quite surprised at how well the GH-1 coped with hand held shutter speeds down to 1/20th sec (with its IS on) and at ISO 1600, and even ISO 3200.

As I was with friends, all were taken quite quickly at default camera settings, hand held, aperture priority with AWB, although for the darker paintings I adjusted exposure compensation.

The main issue at these ISO’s is not really image noise but the horizontal banding artefact which has plagued many a digital camera, not only the GH-1. If you click on the following images (particularly the Tom Roberts one) to see them in larger view, you will be able to make this out of you look closely.

Tom Roberts painting The Wood Splitters taken at 1/20th sec ISO 1600:

Tom Roberts

Charles Blackman’s Street Scene also taken at 1/20th sec at ISO 1600, again, no PS:

Blackman

Frederick McCubbin’s painting, The Letter taken at ISO 3200 – this was a very dark painting and the exposure reasonably accurately reflects this:

McCubbin

More of my photos of paintings in art galleries here.

The Panasonic GH-1 Micro Four Thirds camera won’t replace my Olympus E510 with ZD 50-200mm lens, and is still too big for shirt pocket party point and shoot work, but it does make a great, versatile walkaround camera that is perfect for documentary style and travel photography.

 

Posted in photography | Comments Off on Panasonic GH-1 at high ISO at an art gallery
Tags:

Lens tests II – 85mm and 100mm focal lengths

Written by Gary on September 4th, 2009

Following on from my last post where I tested lenses at 135mm focal length on the Panasonic GH-1, I have performed the same tests using lenses at 85mm focal length but with camera moved closer to the target to maintain the target magnification at a constant.

All performed on tripod with self-timer.

In order of resolution (best to worst):

  • Olympus ZD 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5 SWD at 85mm at f/3.1, f/4, f/5.6 (little difference between them) – almost no purple fringing even wide open
  • Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS at 100mm at f/4 – almost no purple fringing
  • Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 at f/1.8, f/2.8, f/4 – all very sharp, but severe purple fringing at f/1.8, moderate at f/2.8 and almost gone by f/4.0
  • Olympus ZD 50mm f/2.0 macro + ZD EC-20 2x teleconverter – some CA though
  • Panasonic Lumix 14-140mm f/4-5.8 HD at f/5.8 – not far behind the others, but definitely a touch softer
  • Olympus OM 100mm f/2.8 – but very compact, and a great option at f/4 or f/5.6 when it becomes as good as the Lumix albeit without optical image stabiliser but the extra aperture will partly compensate

Interestingly, although not surprisingly, the Canon EF 135mm f/2.0L on a tripod even wide open gave more image detail than any of these lenses (but only just), even when placed further away to ensure the same subject magnification. And, it achieved this with almost no purple fringing – just remember, this lens really needs to have the lens hood on as internal flare tends to be a problem which lowers image contrast.

For its size and versatility, the Panasonic Lumix does at good as most people need, and I would expect the differences in resolution to disappear once you hand hold them.

The Olympus ZD 50-200mm is just a great lens and has the advantage over the Panasonic of not only being sharper with less CA but wider aperture (f/3.1 vs f/5.8 at 85mm) however, is best suited to an image stabilised Olympus Four Thirds dSLR given its size and weight, and lack of AF on the MFT.

The Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 lens is a very well regarded Canon lens – said to be the best of the non-L lenses, and this test showed it was very sharp even wide open. Unfortunately, as is the case with most legacy film lenses, it shows very severe purple fringing at f/1.8 which is still a bit annoying at f/2.8.

I had hoped the Canon 85mm would have made a nice portable wide aperture lens for the Panasonic GH-1 or, better still the Olympus E-P1 with its image stabiliser, but unless you want to post-process all that purple fringing, I think other options may need to be sought.

For comparison, I also tested the beautifully compact Olympus OM 100mm f/2.8 lens a little further away to maintain subject magnification. It was not quite as sharp as the Lumix lens at f/2.8 and f/4 but very close by f/5.6 – in the field, hand held, the differences would not be an issue. Purple fringing was problematic at f/2.8 but acceptable at f/4.

Thus the OM 100mm f/2.8 would be more suited to the Micro Four Thirds than the EF 85mm f/1.8 given its compact size, ability to change apertures and is best used at f/4 or f/5.6, but at least it offers a very compact 200mm f/4 lens in 35mm focal length reach with the option of opening it up to f/2.8 if you had to.

If you were going to take the EF 85mm f/1.8 lens for a little more sharpness than the Lumix or OM 100mm, I would set it at f/2.8 (some purple fringing but better than the OM 100mm at f/2.8) or f/4 (minimal purple fringing).

See some of my photos taken with the GH-1 and OM 100mm f/2.8 lens combo here.

Lastly, I thought I would compare the superb Olympus ZD 50mm f/2.0 macro lens mated with the ZD EC-20 2x teleconverter to make 100mm actual focal length as with the Olympus OM 100mm f/2.8 lens.

This combo even wide open at f/2.0 (f/4.0 for exposure measurement when taking into account the 2x TC), was as sharp as the EF 85mm f./1.8 but showed some CA at f/2.0, f/2.8 and even at f/4 – again, hand held, I would opt for the more compact OM 100mm f/2.8 for use on the MFT cameras.

See photos taken with the 50mm f/2.0 macro plus EC-20 2x TC here, taken with the Olympus E510 dSLR.

 

Posted in lenses | Comments Off on Lens tests II – 85mm and 100mm focal lengths
Tags: , , , ,

Some lens resolution tests on the GH-1 at 135mm focal length

Written by Gary on September 4th, 2009

With the Canon 7D coming out with almost the same sensor photo-site density as the Micro Four Thirds and the Four Thirds sensors (which equate to ~48 megapixels on a 35mm full frame sensor), I thought the 7D may be pushing the Canon lenses given they are not specifically designed for this density as are the Olympus ZD lenses.

Now that I can test my Canon lenses on the same sensor (the Panasonic GH-1) as my Olympus and Panasonic lenses, I thought it is time for a quick test.

So I thought, let’s start at one of their best prime lenses – the Canon 135mm f/2.0 L- if this can’t cut it, then Canon users can forget about getting any resolution benefits from the 7D and their zoom lenses!

I won’t bore you with the charts, but I tested it by setting the GH-1 at ISO 200, IS off, default settings in manual exposure (with same metering for each exposure), on a tripod with magnified live preview manual focus and 10 sec self timer. Photos were taken at the same distance and focal length of a lens resolution chart at 10 meters. No lens filter in place.

I only looked at resolution, not other aberrations.

In order of resolution (best to worst):

  • Canon EF 135mm f/2.0 L lens at f/2.8 and f/4.0
  • Canon EF 135mm f/2.0 L lens at f/2.0 and f/5.6
  • Olympus ZD 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5 SWD at f/5.6
  • Olympus ZD 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5 SWD at f/3.3
  • Canon EF 135mm f/2.0 L lens or Olympus ZD 50-200mm at f/8
  • Canon EF 135mm f/2.0 L lens at f/2.8 but HAND-HELD at 1/500th sec
  • Lumix 14-140mm HD f/4-5.8 at f/8
  • Lumix 14-140mm HD f/4-5.8 at f/5.8, f/6.3

There was not a lot of difference between them all, but there was a definite difference, and the results are much as you would expect, with the top of the range Canon L prime lens just edging out the beautiful, versatile Olympus ZD 50-200mm lens.

As was suggested by dpreview.com’s lens test of the Lumix 14-140mm lens, whilst this lens gives really excellent results at 18-50mm, it is a little soft at the long end, and this was born out in my tests.

Certainly it suggests that diffraction limitations cause resolution to be impaired at f/8 compared with wider apertures, although the Lumix actually was best at f/8 as it was a touch softer wide open at f/5.8.

NOW, to put the cat amongst the pigeons.

I took the camera off the tripod and did some hand held tests as ISO 800 (in order to keep some sort of shutter speed for what is really 270mm focal length reach in 35mm terms). Checked that using ISO 800 in itself didn’t impair detail – and it didn’t.

First, I tested the Canon 135mm L lens hand held at 1/500th sec – surely that should be sufficiently fast with my reasonable ability to hand hold a camera.

WOW, 1/500th sec, f/2.8 and sharpness of the Canon lens dropped off to the level of the Lumix lens at f/8!!

So, then I put my Lumix lens back on and tested it hand held at ISO 800, f/5.8 but now, I had to drop shutter speed to 1/100th sec in the same lighting – result with image stabiliser – AWFUL – converted the 12mp image into a 1-2mp one in terms of detail.

Turned the image stabiliser on in the Lumix lens, re-took the photo, and as expected, MUCH better, but still not quite as good as the results on the tripod!

MORAL of the story, the Canon 135mm f/2.0L lens is really sharp even wide open, but even better at f/2.8 and f/4, BUT if you hand hold it at shutter speeds 1/500th or slower, you may as well be using it on a 5-10mp camera because you lose detail, and unfortunately, Canon and Nikon still refuse to put an image stabiliser into their bodies.

I would suggest that if you are going to hand hold the Canon 135mm f/2.0L lens at less than 1/500th sec, and you are happy to use it at a fixed aperture and in manual focus, then the sharpest images will not be from a 18mp Canon 7D but from a 12mp Olympus E-P1 with it’s in-built image stabiliser!

If you want more than 12 mpixels of details out of your camera, then unless you use a very fast shutter speed, you need to put it on a tripod – perhaps the Sony full frame dSLRs with their in-built IS will give much more detail hand held than a Canon or Nikon full frame?

Camera shake effectively converts your expensive lens to a cheap lens and in the process could convert your high megapixel sensor into a low megapixel sensor but with big file sizes.

See some of my hand held photos taken with the GH-1 and EF 135mm f/2.0L combo here.

 

Posted in lenses | Comments Off on Some lens resolution tests on the GH-1 at 135mm focal length
Tags: , , ,

Blog is back up after outage due to hardware issues

Written by Gary on September 4th, 2009
 

Posted in photography | Comments Off on Blog is back up after outage due to hardware issues

New cameras as at early Sept 2009 – my dream camera, what would I consider buying and what would I take hiking or traveling?

Written by Gary on September 3rd, 2009

If only they would get together and combine the best features of the Panasonic GF-1, GH-1, Olympus E-P1 and the Canon G11, and add a couple more features, we would have a dream compact digital – here is what I would like:

  • E-P1’s image stabiliser built-in and which could be activated if there is no optical IS option – otherwise use the optical IS, especially in movie mode and to speed up AF
  • GH-1’s video capability, fast AF, over-sized sensor for non-cropped 16:9 aspect ratio and swivel LCD, and ability to use the Leica-D aperture rings on the lenses
  • GF-1’s optional EVF but with the possibility of using alternative external or remote EVF, or at least a live HDMI video out so that one could record raw video output to an external device at higher video bit rates if desired, or in uncompressed format to allow stacking for astrophotography , or even RAW video capture for extra high quality video that could be graded better (post-processed)
  • G11’s flash sync to 1/2000th sec with full flash output for better fill-in flash in bright sunlight
  • an option to shoot only with the electronic shutter for silent operation such as during weddings
  • I can live without the flash built-in, but at least give us remote TTL flash capability as with Olympus dSLRs and a sync port in case the EVF is sitting in the hotshoe
  • camera electronic level indicator as with Olympus E-30 or Canon 7D, or perhaps better still, an option to have the sensor self-level as with the new Pentax dSLR
  • someone please design a tilt-shift adapter for MFT which would then effectively convert nearly all non-MFT lenses to tilt-shift lenses – this is really ONLY possible on MFT bodies, so please can we have one?
  • and while on that point, a Canon EOS-MFT adapter which allows you to change the lens aperture

But then, who would buy another camera once they have all those features?

Oh, yes, we would need a dedicated body without the IR blocking filter for infrared photography and astrophotography.

My conclusions on what camera to buy now:

  • if you want the best AF HD video available in a still camera – the GH-1 is it
  • if you want a pocketable camera that is great for travel and bright situations, the Canon G11 with its high flash sync, slightly smaller size and 5x zoom with optical viewfinder looks a great option, but bear in mind its limitations as outlined in the previous post
  • if you want a slimline interchangeable lens camera that is potentially pocketable, then there are two options depending on your priorities:
    • the GF-1’s inbuilt flash, faster AF and optional EVF will better suit most inexperienced point and shoot photographers while giving them a lot of room to grow
    • the E-P1’s built-in image stabiliser is a better match for using a pancake lens or legacy MF lenses, so for the street photographer or sentimentalists who just want to have fun using almost any lens ever made, the E-P1 makes better sense than the GF-1
  • if you need an entry level dSLR then I would have a close look at the new Olympus E-600 / E-620 or the heavier E-30 or the weatherproof E-3 (although I would probably wait for its next version unless you get it at a good price) and consider mating it with a Olympus ZD 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5 lens – you won’t get a lighter kit with the similar telephoto reach, image quality, versatility and wide aperture anywhere! In addition, the combination of ZD 9-18mm lens and the kit lenses make for a great travel combination.
  • if you need a sports camera capable of 8fps with good telephoto reach, then consider the new Canon 7D or the Nikon D300s and perhaps consider the really heavy 70-200mm f/2.8 IS lenses or a 400mm f/5.6L lens
  • if you want an entry level full frame camera and you don’t really need sports AF or burst rate capability, then the Canon 5DMII is probably the way to go, although the new Sony a850 with its built-in image stabiliser may end up giving you more consistently sharper images
  • if you have money to burn and want the current ultimate full frame dSLR- wide angle zoom combo , then it’s the Nikon D3x and the superb AF-S 14-24mm f/2.8 lens – one of the best reasons to buy into Nikon – if you can afford it!

For a hiking trip where weight is an issue but inconspicuous is not, this is my preferred kit:

  • Olympus dSLR E510/E520/E600/E620/E30/E3 – any will be fine although the E-3 will give you benefit of almost water-proofed kit for when it rains, plus, Olympus ZD 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5 SWD lens because it is so versatile, weather-proofed, with such high image quality, nice bokeh, reasonable macro at 1.2m and gives telephoto reach of 800mm in 35mm terms when used with the beautiful EC-20 2x teleconverter, and can be used in MF on the GH-1 for very cool HD videos – this lens is one of THE REASONS to buy into the Olympus dSLR range – no other lens matches its versatility and image quality for the price and weight.
  • plus, Panasonic GH-1 with 14-140mm HD lens giving 28-280mm coverage with HD video to 560mm in 35mm terms, plus FT-MFT adapter
  • that only leaves a ultra-wide angle and I would probably go for the ZD 9-18mm (which I don’t own but gets very favorable reports) as it will AF on both cameras and provides a nice 18-36mm range, image stabilised on the Olympus camera
  • in reality, I would also probably add my Leica-D 25mm f/1.4 FT lens if low light was going to be a problem.

Now for travel overseas, what would I take?

  • here’s a very interesting forum with quite diverse ideas on what to take to Cambodia
  • but, what would I take? I would always take 2 cameras so I do not need to be changing lenses, and as light and inconspicuous as possible – yep, dump the Canon and Nikon dSLR gear!
  • Olympus E-P1 with either the 17mm f/2.8 or perhaps better still, the Lumix 20mm f/1.7 pancake lens, will give fantastic low light capability with built-in IS and good ISO 1600, making it ideal for indoors and street photography as well as usual travel snapshots – perhaps take the Olympus retractable zoom kit lens as well for times when you need a bit of zoom PLUS FT-MFT adapter so you can shoot video with your FT lenses if needed PLUS if you can afford it, the Lumix 7-14mm MFT lens for ultra-wide angle shots.
  • PLUS a Olympus E-600 or 620 with kit lenses and ZD 50mm f/2 macro (for when you need to blur the background, and makes a nice compliment to E-P1 with 20mm lens), plus ZD 9-18mm if I didn’t have the 7-14mm MFT lens (I would also love to take the ZD 50-200mm but its a touch big & heavy, while others may go for a wider aperture kit lens such as the ZD 14-54mm II lens (will AF on the E-P1 too) or ZD 12-60mm)
 

Posted in cameras | 3 Responses »
Tags: , , ,

Panasonic officially announces the new GF-1 and two new MFT lenses – how does it compare?

Written by Gary on September 3rd, 2009

As has been rumoured, Panasonic has now officially announced their new Micro Four Thirds camera – the slimline GF-1 which is very similar to the Olympus E-P1 but with some important differences.

GF-1

See here for a general comparison of the E-P1 and Canon G11.

New Micro Four Thirds lenses:

  • Panasonic Lumix 20mm f/1.7 MFT pancake kit lens
    • seems very nice, compact and will be great for street photography – pity there is no IS in the body to extend its low light capabilities hand held though – you will need to use it on the Olympus E-P1 to get that!
    • the big question – how will it compare with the Olympus ZD MFT 17mm f/2.8 pancake lens – I suspect if the 20mm is at least as good at f/2.8, then the 20mm would be the way I would go if price is similar as the extra low light capability will be VERY handy!
  • Panasonic Leica-D MFT 45mm f/2.8 1:1 macro with OIS
    • at last a high quality macro lens for the MFT with contrast detect AF and focus range limiter, and has a built-in optical image stabiliser to boot
    • very nice, although will be expensive, and will not be able to be used on a Four Thirds camera as it is a MFT lens
    • not as good a portrait lens as the Four Thirds Olympus ZD 50mm f/2.0 macro – but that lens will not AF with the GF-1, and it does not have IS or a focal range limiter – hopefully Olympus will be updating this lens soon, especially now that Canon has produced what appears to be a brilliant 100mm f/2.8 IS L macro lens
  • Lumix MFT lenses coming in 2010:

Now for some comparisons between the GF-1 and similar cameras:

The main specifications which differ from the Olympus E-P1:

  • no in-body image stabiliser – a pity because this may in the end be a show stopper for me!
  • no optional optical viewfinder but an optional electronic viewfinder which can be put into the hotshoe and angled upwards
  • built-in pop-up flash
  • faster AF but not as compatible with Four Thirds lenses for AF as is the E-P1
  • different approach to creative “film modes”
  • appearance is not classical retro style as is the E-P1
  • HD movie LITE is only mono audio not stereo
  • jpeg colours are not quite as “nice” as Olympus – but then Olympus is arguably the world leader in “nice” jpeg images out of the camera

The main specifications which differ from the Panasonic GH-1:

  • slimmer and the 20mm f/1.7 pancake kit lens provides a much more compact and lighter option to the GH-1 with it’s bigger, heavier, more versatile image stabilised 14-140mm HD lens
  • HD video LITE only – mono not stereo, 720p not 1080i, but otherwise seems to have similar video options such as MPEG 720p as well as AVCHD 720p 60/50fps BUT sensor output is 30fps (not 60fps as on the GH-1) and for the vast majority of users, the 720p option is probably the best anyway as it gives smoother motion results, although 720p may not be as nice as on the GH-1 given the 30fps sensor output rate?
  • no continuous AF during video unless you use the 14-140mm HD lens, but you can at least do intermittent AF unlike with most dSLRs such as current Canon and Nikon models
  • image aspect ratio option disappointingly is now the same as on most other cameras – a rather useless crop option which may as well be done in Photoshop – the GH-1 has an over-sized sensor which allows 16:9 ratio and 3:2 ratios to give true wider images, not just crops restrained to maximum 4000 pixels wide
  • additional option of “peripheral defocus” to produce a Lens Baby-like effect in camera and which will also work in movie mode – perhaps this may be in a firmware upgrade for the GH-1
  • LCD is fixed – not swivel as is the one on the GH-1
  • metal body

The main specifications which differ from the Canon G11:

  • much larger sensor – ~5x larger and thus much larger photosites allowing for better image quality, shallower depth of field, improved high ISO capability
  • ability to use almost any lens ever made via adapters instead of a fixed 5x zoom 28-140mm f/2.8-4.5 lens
  • timed shutter speed to 60 secs not just 15 secs – great for astrophotography
  • exposure compensation +/- 3EV not just 2EV
  • burst rate 3fps not just 1.1fps
  • HD video at 720p not just old VGA video at 480p
  • optional EVF instead of an in-built optical viewfinder
  • fixed LCD instead of swivel
  • kit lens is 20mm f/1.7 without IS – better for general low light work and shallow DOF work but not quite as versatile in bright light as the 5x zoom of the Canon G11
  • flash sync to 1/160th sec no where near the G11’s very nice 1/2000th flash sync – but if you can’t get shallow DOF portraits with the G11, there does not seem much point to having the high flash sync other than as general fill-in flash in bright sunlight – now, if the MFT’s cameras could come up with flash sync 1/2000th sec at full flash output not just SuperFP/HSS flash, that would be special – would be using my ZD 50mm f/2.0 and ZD 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5 lens with fill in flash in bright sunlight a lot more than I would now!

See also dpreview.com for a preview of the GF-1.

This site suggests that the AF on the GF-1 may be even faster than on the GH-1 and the shutter seems to be even quieter. While imaging-resource suggests the GF-1’s prefocused shutter lag is also faster than the GH-1.

 

Posted in cameras | Comments Off on Panasonic officially announces the new GF-1 and two new MFT lenses – how does it compare?
Tags: ,

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »