Anyone Using the Panasonic G1 ??

I love my G1, take it with me on most off-work days. In the daytime I use the 14-45 lens almost exclusively, but sometimes also take the 20-1.7 if I expect to be indoors in subdued lighting.

In bright lighting the 14-45 is the better lens for me, offering a wider wide angle and telephoto options, and is at least as well corrected as is the 20. And its autofocus performance is just plain better; silent operation and focus so quick that one never notices it even focusing.

The 20-f/1.7 is incredible in subdued natural lighting, but it's wide f/1.7 aperture is of no use outdoors in bright sun, since the exposure times, even at ISO100, exceed the shutter's maximum speed. I could use an ND filter, I suppose, but that defeats the purpose. The 14-45 does a good 20mm f.l. in bright sun.

The AF performance of my sample of the 20 tends to hunt in low-contrast situations; I use center-weighted AF and the lens will often choose to first hunt for focus in the wrong direction, after it reaches that limit it reverses and finds focus. It's not a total limiter to using the lens effectively, but its AF operation one is always aware of; it's not transparent to the user like the 14-45.

~Joe
 
Last edited:
Ray,

You said in part:

<I use the M-mount and the F-mount adapters. I like to use my Nokton 40/1.4 and my wide Nikkors on the camera. The 2x crop factor is a bit much, but the m4/3 lenses are really very good (especially the Panasonic 20/1.7). I own the 20 and the 14-45,>




/[/quote]

I have the same adapters and used the as you do. As for the use of 20/1.7 in addition to 14-45, do you find it's an overlap and make you want to switch to the other when you have one of them on your camera. I ask this silly question because I just own the kit 14-45 and struggling to decide whether I should get the 20/1.7.
 
Joe Leung said:
Ray,

You said in part:

<I use the M-mount and the F-mount adapters. I like to use my Nokton 40/1.4 and my wide Nikkors on the camera. The 2x crop factor is a bit much, but the m4/3 lenses are really very good (especially the Panasonic 20/1.7). I own the 20 and the 14-45,>



I have the same adapters and used the as you do. As for the use of 20/1.7 in addition to 14-45, do you find it's an overlap and make you want to switch to the other when you have one of them on your camera. I ask this silly question because I just own the kit 14-45 and struggling to decide whether I should get the 20/1.7.
Click to expand...

I get caught in the overlap sometimes, but not to the point where I'm kicking myself. I find I switch when I want the extra reach and when I need the speed or smaller size. The two are just different enough that it isn't a pain. But, I find that lately I have been using both m4/3 lenses more than the adapted lenses. 🙂


/
 
Many people here will disagree with me but I will chime in here as I used to have a G1.

I was very disappointed in my G1 because of its image processing made images feel flat and lifeless. When using the kit lens there was not much to say about that, however when using adapted lenses, from different brands and qualities there was so little in the results that you could not pick out the character of the lenses in the photos. All the lenses were equalized by the Panasonic's aggressive image processing which for instance you could not tell the difference in the rendering qualities of a Zeiss or Leica lens to the kit lens.

Some people say you cannot see the different anyway, buy you can, you most certainly can, as I sold my G1 and got an Olympus EP1 which does not has such aggressive color and tone antilogarithms and let the qualities of the different lenses shine through in the final image, especially for my Zeiss lenses which have very specific rendering qualities compared to other lenses that did not transfer well with the Panasonic.

It must be said however, that it seems that the Panasonic and Olympus cameras do not adjust things like distortion or vignetting and such with adapted lenses as that correction information is stored in the native m/3 lenses and sent to the camera via electronic interface which of course adapted lenses do not have. What I am speaking about up there is the cameras (even raw) tinkering of the image in regards to its rendering qualities.
 
Last edited:
Avotius said:
Many people here will disagree with me but I will chime in here as I used to have a G1.

I was very disappointed in my G1 because of its image processing made images feel flat and lifeless. When using the kit lens there was not much to say about that, however when using adapted lenses, from different brands and qualities there was so little in the results that you could not pick out the character of the lenses in the photos. All the lenses were equalized by the Panasonic's aggressive image processing which for instance you could not tell the difference in the rendering qualities of a Zeiss or Leica lens to the kit lens.

Some people say you cannot see the different anyway, buy you can, you most certainly can, as I sold my G1 and got an Olympus EP1 which does not has such aggressive color and tone antilogarithms and let the qualities of the different lenses shine through in the final image, especially for my Zeiss lenses which have very specific rendering qualities compared to other lenses that did not transfer well with the Panasonic.

It must be said however, that it seems that the Panasonic and Olympus cameras do not adjust things like distortion or vignetting and such with adapted lenses as that correction information is stored in the native m/3 lenses and sent to the camera via electronic interface which of course adapted lenses do not have. What I am speaking about up there is the cameras (even raw) tinkering of the image in regards to its rendering qualities.
Click to expand...

Actually i have had opposite results from your findings, i noticed the planars are sharp and pop, the nikkor 5.8cmf1.4 has a swirly bokeh as reported, all can been seen either in JPEG or RAW. Scroll up and see my earlier post for links to pics. It is just that the character is less pronounced with the 2x crop factor. I don't think the kit lens can reproduce this

NK 58f1.4
4509973238_d03a671ea0.jpg


CZ planar 50f1.7
4231230040_15a659d0e5.jpg


Nokton 50f1.5 LTM
4560193603_f9c59c58c9.jpg


Maybe other users with adapted lenses can feedback on the experience, i know that mine is positive.
 
at the moment yes 🙂 but it's too big for me and I therefore rarely take it out, I'm used to pocket cameras- hence I am selling it.

I am however impressed with it as such a relatively cheap camera - if you want some examples here's my blog, bearing in mind I'm a distinct amateur so you may well be able to get far better results out of the thing.

http://alicemouse.wordpress.com/

Many of the photos linked to my profile on here were taken with a G1 also.

for the price - it's an excellent buy.
 
I've had the G1 for maybe around 8-9 months now and had used it as my primary camera up until buying an m6 a few weeks ago. I inherited a Noctilux and bought the G1 and m-mount adapter to use with that lens and rarely have I taken that lens off.

It works great. It is cropped (obviously) so you don't get all of the Noctilux love (no vignetting wide open) but you definitely can see the bokeh. The EVF is outstanding and having played with most of the other 4/3rds cameras out today, none look as good as the G1/GH1. Focusing is easy with the zoom and I find that I focus better with it then with M6 (though I'm still getting used to a rangefinder so there's that)

I almost never use the kit lens. I never really cared for the look myself and really it's tough to go back when I'm so used to the real leica lens 🙂 I also much prefer to have f-stop control on the lens rather then anywhere else on the camera. Also, I've tried shooting some with a 35mm summilux but it had a bit too much of a weird glow to every shot so I moved back to the noct.

All in all I really enjoyed the camera and got a lot out of it. That being said once I got the M6 I haven't looked back 🙂

here are a few shots I took with the G1/Noct combo:

4201577889_4125494a0b.jpg


4124335062_1e0bd3918f_o.jpg


4118738423_7b3a9f9b27.jpg


I lucked out on this one. It was a bright day out and I wanted to do a macro of the tulip, so I took the lens off the camera and handheld it far enough away to get an impromptu macro:
4440646727_b00d4d7b0c.jpg
 
Avotius said:
I was very disappointed in my G1 because of its image processing made images feel flat and lifeless. When using the kit lens there was not much to say about that, however when using adapted lenses, from different brands and qualities there was so little in the results that you could not pick out the character of the lenses in the photos. All the lenses were equalized by the Panasonic's aggressive image processing which for instance you could not tell the difference in the rendering qualities of a Zeiss or Leica lens to the kit lens.
Click to expand...

That doesnt make a lot of sense technically. Native m43 lenses will be auto-corrected in any m43 body. With legacy lenses whatever is projected on sensor is recorded. The in-camera processing does (and can) not affect "bokeh", depth of field, absolute sharpness or color rendition. The camera does not communicate with the lens. It doesnt even "know" that a lens is attached. It will just take a picture when you press the shutter button and white balance that as far as it calculates it correct.
 
I have been on a G1 GAS kick for the past 24 hours or so. I imagine the lenses are pretty good. But the post by Avotius about the processing is scaring me off. Then again, the pictures in this post don't seem flat or lifeless.

Comments/observations? quick, before my GAS attack goes into remission . . .
 
The G1 has been my primary digital camera since 2009. Long in the tooth, perhaps. But the ergonomics are great.

I recently acquired a new in box Vivitar series 5, 24mm f/2.8 in Minolta mount, which is now my primary lens. Superb manual focus and aperture control. The poor man's CV25.

Now, my working methods have gravitated to shooting JPEGs in the G1 and importing them via the camera connector USB port to iPad2, where I process them and upload. These two examples were taken just this morning and were processed in the Cameramatic app.

I've come to believe that 4/3rd's cameras and iPads are a great combination, since they both share the same aspect ratio of display, and sport smaller form factors than their alternatives.

~Joe

6852993822_d77b80e4c4_z.jpg


6852990690_6a288a7c75_z.jpg
 
The Panasonic G2 is a fine little camera... I bought one for my wife as a step up from her Nikon p&s. She likes it. I occasionally use a Pentax K20D, but prefer the Leica.
 
Rob-F, so did you end up buying a G1? It has been two years since I posted on this thread and I'm still heavily using my G1. The G2s are old enough now for you to find deals on used ones, and the G1s should be really affordable by now. Both are still fine cameras and either model will serve you well if you can find one in good condition. --Warren
 
Warren T. said:
Rob-F, so did you end up buying a G1? It has been two years since I posted on this thread and I'm still heavily using my G1. The G2s are old enough now for you to find deals on used ones, and the G1s should be really affordable by now. Both are still fine cameras and either model will serve you well if you can find one in good condition. --Warren
Click to expand...

Nope. Didn't buy one yet. Still in the thinking stage. I love my D-lux 3 and D-Lux 4 so much, I'm also thinking I should get a D-Lux 5, or else the Panny LS-5, which is much the same thing. I presume the iQ should be higher in the G1--bigger sensor.
 
G1 contentment/versatility

G1 contentment/versatility

I've used the G1 since December 2009, and while I've taken significant digital time away from it for the Ricoh GRD III (totally pocketable, zoom with your legs) and the GXR (for the ergonomics, ease of navigation + Leica mount adaptability), I am still quite happy to have its portability and versatility with Contax G lenses, OM Zuiko lenses,and M/LTM lenses. I also rely on the 20/1.7 and 14/2.5.

Though this is not part of the thread, I A/B'd the G1 with the EP1 for over a year, and gave the EP1 + 14-45 ( + OM adapter + a few second-string OM lenses) to my son, so he can a lens-changing camera body in addition to his LX3.

I like the G1 EVF magnification/focus, I really prefer having diopter-correction on all VF cameras so I can shoot without my specs, and I like a tilt screen that lets me shoot at ankle level without having to lie down on the squishy Oregon ground in these rainy months.

And right now, with the G1 mounting the 45/2 Planar, I couldn't be happier. Even with the 2x crop factor.
 
I recently bought a G2 as they went on sale here for $299 (body only, but including a genuine spare battery) which just seemed way too good to pass up, even if I ended up not using it much. I ordered a Novoflex adapter so I can play around with my old Minolta MC-MD lenses until I square away the cash for a 25mm 1.4.

I expect the EVF to be very helpful in bright sunlight and I am a huge fan of tilt-swivel screens as on the G2 and various Canons. The G3 was tempting for its better sensor but I disliked the lack of external controls and the fact that it's still twice the price of the G2 (body only), which was important as this is more of an experiment for me than a serious endeavour (ditto for the GF3 - better sensor, no built-in EVF and (inexplicably) even more expensive than the G3)

It sure is a fun camera to play around with. I hope to have the adapter in my hot little hands in a week or so and will waste no time posting some pics! I have Minolta prime lenses in 24, 28, 35, 45, 50 and 85mm and really look forward to seeing how their distinctive "look" translates into digital! The screen resolution is a noticable let-down compared to what I'm used to on DSLRs, though some of that impression is due to the non-aliased fonts used in the menu system.

Regards,
Scott
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom