Charlie Lemay
Well-known
I'm looking to buy a GF1 or Ep2 and had a few questions that might help me decide. From the tests I've read, the GF1 has better autofocus and Raw file sharpness, while the EP-2 has in body stabilization and better JPG files. No one seems to like the kit lenses for each, so:
1) If I intend to use the Leica D 14-50 f2.8-3.5 zoom with a Panasonic standard 4/3 to Micro 4/3 adapter, can I expect the same great results I experienced with a Digilux 3 or Panansonic DMC L1K? That is is the firmware in either the GF1 or Ep-2 going to correct distortion, if there is any and maintain all auto functions? Will the image stabilization in the lens work with the GF1 and the in body stabilization work in the EP-2?
2) IS the data port for both cameras where the EVF attaches also made to the same standard. In other words, can the superior EP-2 EVF be used with the GF1?
1) If I intend to use the Leica D 14-50 f2.8-3.5 zoom with a Panasonic standard 4/3 to Micro 4/3 adapter, can I expect the same great results I experienced with a Digilux 3 or Panansonic DMC L1K? That is is the firmware in either the GF1 or Ep-2 going to correct distortion, if there is any and maintain all auto functions? Will the image stabilization in the lens work with the GF1 and the in body stabilization work in the EP-2?
2) IS the data port for both cameras where the EVF attaches also made to the same standard. In other words, can the superior EP-2 EVF be used with the GF1?
squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
Not sure about #1, but I can say definitely no to #2.
If you're going to adapt a large zoom like that, I strongly recommend the G1 instead. The small cameras are quite awkward with large lenses--there is no real grip. They're great with small lenses though. (Or the GF1 is, anyway, that's the one I've got.)
If you're going to adapt a large zoom like that, I strongly recommend the G1 instead. The small cameras are quite awkward with large lenses--there is no real grip. They're great with small lenses though. (Or the GF1 is, anyway, that's the one I've got.)
Avotius
Some guy
#1 that is a hard one to say, I dont know, but am guessing that there would be reduced performance in auto focus or something like that.
#2 No.
Also the jpg's out of the EP1 are significantly worse then the raw's (obviously) but I was surprised how much worse they were. Coming from Canon DSLR's where the raw and jpg quality is something you have to pick through at 100%, the EP1's are very obvious. Raw highly recommended, especially when shooting higher ISO where the EP1's jpg processing really lets it down. As for raw file sharpness between the GF1 and EP1, I think there is nothing much in it, but personally I prefer the EP1's images, much more natural looking rendering.
#2 No.
Also the jpg's out of the EP1 are significantly worse then the raw's (obviously) but I was surprised how much worse they were. Coming from Canon DSLR's where the raw and jpg quality is something you have to pick through at 100%, the EP1's are very obvious. Raw highly recommended, especially when shooting higher ISO where the EP1's jpg processing really lets it down. As for raw file sharpness between the GF1 and EP1, I think there is nothing much in it, but personally I prefer the EP1's images, much more natural looking rendering.
user237428934
User deletion pending
This link is quite helpful. It's a compatibility chart for the panasonic G models.
When you scroll down a bit then you see two 14-50 panasonic lenses. One supports AF, the other one not. So you need the correct type number.
http://panasonic.jp/support/global/cs/dsc/connect/g1.html
When you scroll down a bit then you see two 14-50 panasonic lenses. One supports AF, the other one not. So you need the correct type number.
http://panasonic.jp/support/global/cs/dsc/connect/g1.html
250swb
Well-known
I'd disagree that 'nobody likes the kit lenses'. The Panasonic 14-45mm is a very good lens when used on either the GF-1 or EP-2, or on any m4/3 body. Its only 'kit' in terms of speed and I tend to think its the word alone that makes people wary, with ideas that its going to be as bad as some Canon and Nikon kit lenses.If it were me buying into m4/3 all over again I'd get either the GF1 or EP-1, with either the Pana 14-45mm or 20mm pancake, or ideally both. There is no problem using Panasonic lenses on the EP-2, and indeed the focusing is faster than using Olympus lenses on the EP-2 body. Using the 4/3 Leica designed lens with adapter on either camera blows a hole in the idea that its a small compact system.Steve
Charlie Lemay
Well-known
Everyone. Thanks for the great advice. I will weigh these insights and maybe wait to see an EP-2 before deciding.
Benjamin Marks
Veteran
There is a useful (and practical) review of the EP1 at http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/
count_zero
Established
I find the inbody IS on the EP-1 invaluable especially with non 4/3 large lenses. This image was shot using a Minolta MD 135mm (270mm equiv). And, you can save a lot of money buying adapters off e-bay rather than the name brand versions (they work just as well if not better in some cases).
Avotius
Some guy
Of all the unusual uses for the EP1, I have found that it is wonderfully suited to doing product photography, especially where you need to pick up the detail of an item close up or in an awkward position. I do a lot of sculpture photography and you can get in and around things with the camera and view the screen where with an SLR you would be out of luck. I also use the zoom kit lens for that kind of photography, it works really well indeed with the close focus abilities and compact size.
kbg32
neo-romanticist
Sorry to say, but the Panasonic Lumix 14-45 is a great lens, as is the 7-14. It has gotten great reviews and is quite sharp. I am very happy with the results I get from it.
I concur with Steve. Using adapted lenses on the G1, GF1, or the Olympus, doesn't make sense to me unless you are after a special effect. I don't want my Leica M lenses to be doubled in focal length, or to increase the size of the camera. The Lumix lenses were designed for this system and I find, as others do, that these work best. I enjoy having a small bag with one body and coverage from 14mm - 400mm (35mm equiv.), in 3 small zooms.
I concur with Steve. Using adapted lenses on the G1, GF1, or the Olympus, doesn't make sense to me unless you are after a special effect. I don't want my Leica M lenses to be doubled in focal length, or to increase the size of the camera. The Lumix lenses were designed for this system and I find, as others do, that these work best. I enjoy having a small bag with one body and coverage from 14mm - 400mm (35mm equiv.), in 3 small zooms.
Last edited:
gavinlg
Veteran
Honestly if you want a zoom lens, get the panasonic 14-45mm, it's very small, and very good quality optically. The olympus zoom is a bit weird for me with it's telescopic thing it's got going on. Both panasonic and olympus pancakes are very good, the panasonic being better of the two, but more expensive.
Out of the e-p1/e-p2 and gf1 I chose the e-p1. Theres a certain magic about the body, it's so nice to hold and everything (including AF) works really well. The panasonic feels like a plastic digicam and the files have the typical panasonic over processed treatment to them.
Out of the e-p1/e-p2 and gf1 I chose the e-p1. Theres a certain magic about the body, it's so nice to hold and everything (including AF) works really well. The panasonic feels like a plastic digicam and the files have the typical panasonic over processed treatment to them.