fotomik
Member
I'm looking for some experiences from people (like myself) who have carried an M with them for a long time, and have "switched", or appended their everyday system with an m4/3 camera (which I haven't done yet), more specifically an EP or GF1.
How's it been? Happy? Disappointed? Any specific pros/cons?
As a background, I shoot 99% of the time with an M6 and a 35 ´cron, 90% ISO 400 color negatives. And I've been looking for AGES for a reasonable alternative in the digital flavor. And no, the M8/M9 is NOT a reasonable alternative for me. So I've boiled my alternatives down to the EP-1 and EP-2, with the 20mm 1.7, or in a pinch the 17/2.8. The EP-1 + 17/2.8-combo is DIRT cheap at the moment, can be had for less than an LX-5 Panny, for heavens sake. The GF-1, although it lacks the IS which i'd love to have, is still on the shortlist also, mainly for the price.
I have a feeling that noise-wise the IQ is on par for my needs (with this setup that is, the Nikons are for work, this is for freetime), but how IS the rest of it? Dynamic range in the real world, usability etc.
That elusive "feel" of carrying and shooting with the M is hard to replicate, I'm sure, but is it really even close?
How's it been? Happy? Disappointed? Any specific pros/cons?
As a background, I shoot 99% of the time with an M6 and a 35 ´cron, 90% ISO 400 color negatives. And I've been looking for AGES for a reasonable alternative in the digital flavor. And no, the M8/M9 is NOT a reasonable alternative for me. So I've boiled my alternatives down to the EP-1 and EP-2, with the 20mm 1.7, or in a pinch the 17/2.8. The EP-1 + 17/2.8-combo is DIRT cheap at the moment, can be had for less than an LX-5 Panny, for heavens sake. The GF-1, although it lacks the IS which i'd love to have, is still on the shortlist also, mainly for the price.
I have a feeling that noise-wise the IQ is on par for my needs (with this setup that is, the Nikons are for work, this is for freetime), but how IS the rest of it? Dynamic range in the real world, usability etc.
That elusive "feel" of carrying and shooting with the M is hard to replicate, I'm sure, but is it really even close?
silverbullet
Well-known
Just like you I use RF cameras (Bessa R4 and ZI) since several years after my re-entry into photography around 2006. Beside my D300 the E-P2 is THE companion now in 99% of my time.
At first I thought that the menues from Oly aree not so easy to handle by me (62 years old) but this is not the case.
The cam produces wonderful colours (mainly RAW - Lightroom 3) and the handling and speed is fast for my style of streetshots.
If I would plan to shoot in dark churches and other dim locations, my D300 would be the choice, but the IBIS and the 20mm panny are ok for hand-held actions without tripod.
After several days in Sicily I'm very confident to take this cam to Krakow next week and to Istanbul top of December. Sorry for the D300.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/36573929@N00/sets/72157625031362422/
The Novoflex adapter for my M lenses works fine and a recently purchased Summilux 50mm (old) delivers very fine pics with a real creamy bokeh.
I'm not a teleshooter but when the lenses are in your bag, why not to use them on the Pen?
The handling with the VEF and manual settings including focusing is fast and easy.
F.E. you only have to press one buttton to enlarge the free positioned focus-frame and again the knob to come back to the total view. Easy.
But keep in mind that due to the overall design, wide angles of M lenses have problems with the sensor. Wider that 35mm (70mm due to factor 2) are soso....honestly I never tested a Voigtlander 15 or 12mm and my Color Skopar 21 f4 isn't so fast and easy and sharp over all as the dream lens Pana pancake 20mm f1.7.
The EVF is very fine to use for me therefore I sold directly my E-P1 when the P2 arrived in the market.
Honestly I feel really fine with this cam, it's the same feeling as I had with my NikonF long time ago.......:angel:
Sidenote:
I'm thrilled by the new Fuji X100! This cam could be a partner in the bag but I feel a little limited by 35mm.......
At first I thought that the menues from Oly aree not so easy to handle by me (62 years old) but this is not the case.
The cam produces wonderful colours (mainly RAW - Lightroom 3) and the handling and speed is fast for my style of streetshots.
If I would plan to shoot in dark churches and other dim locations, my D300 would be the choice, but the IBIS and the 20mm panny are ok for hand-held actions without tripod.
After several days in Sicily I'm very confident to take this cam to Krakow next week and to Istanbul top of December. Sorry for the D300.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/36573929@N00/sets/72157625031362422/
The Novoflex adapter for my M lenses works fine and a recently purchased Summilux 50mm (old) delivers very fine pics with a real creamy bokeh.
I'm not a teleshooter but when the lenses are in your bag, why not to use them on the Pen?
The handling with the VEF and manual settings including focusing is fast and easy.
F.E. you only have to press one buttton to enlarge the free positioned focus-frame and again the knob to come back to the total view. Easy.
But keep in mind that due to the overall design, wide angles of M lenses have problems with the sensor. Wider that 35mm (70mm due to factor 2) are soso....honestly I never tested a Voigtlander 15 or 12mm and my Color Skopar 21 f4 isn't so fast and easy and sharp over all as the dream lens Pana pancake 20mm f1.7.
The EVF is very fine to use for me therefore I sold directly my E-P1 when the P2 arrived in the market.
Honestly I feel really fine with this cam, it's the same feeling as I had with my NikonF long time ago.......:angel:
Sidenote:
I'm thrilled by the new Fuji X100! This cam could be a partner in the bag but I feel a little limited by 35mm.......
Last edited:
silverbullet
Well-known
mike_j
Established
I bought a Panasonic G1 to supplement my M6 and to let me use the lenses on a digital body.
It was a wonderful new toy and I thoroughly immersed myself in all it could do and all the strange legacy lenses it could use. Then I started to get fed up with the feel and handling and menus. Results were OK but the camera brought out the worst in me - low grade snapshots.
A year later I bought an M8 and have barely used the G1 since. It languishes unloved in a cupboard, only brought out for macro work or when I want a knockabout camera that I don't much care about (fishing trips in an open boat for example).
The 20mm f1.7 Panasonic lens is the best thing about the system. With a GF1 it would be better but the GF1 wasn't around when I bought into the system and don't intend spending anymore money on MFT.
It was a wonderful new toy and I thoroughly immersed myself in all it could do and all the strange legacy lenses it could use. Then I started to get fed up with the feel and handling and menus. Results were OK but the camera brought out the worst in me - low grade snapshots.
A year later I bought an M8 and have barely used the G1 since. It languishes unloved in a cupboard, only brought out for macro work or when I want a knockabout camera that I don't much care about (fishing trips in an open boat for example).
The 20mm f1.7 Panasonic lens is the best thing about the system. With a GF1 it would be better but the GF1 wasn't around when I bought into the system and don't intend spending anymore money on MFT.
Dogman
Veteran
Your circumstances sound a lot like mine.
Prior to "going digital", the majority of my shooting was done with two M6 bodies, one fitted with a 35mm Summicron and a 50mm Summicron on the other. I carried a 21mm Voigtlander and a 90mm Elmar-C but they were only used on rare occasions. I shot B&W, however. That changed when I started shooting digital with a Canon SLR a few years ago. Now I'm about 99% all color, done digitally. I shoot some with my Canon DSLR but it's more specialized now. I started using a Canon G10 for most of my general photography prior to using micro 4/3 cameras. The G10 is a great little camera for image quality at low ISO but less so at the higher ISOs.
A digital M is not a financial alternative for me either. I recently retired and I need to watch my pennies. I would love a couple of M9 bodies but it ain't gonna happen so I ain't gonna sweat it.
A few months back, I bought an E-P1 with 17/2.8. While it took some getting used to, I have to admit it is replacing my Leicas in use. I'm more about ergonomics than absolute image quality. I do have some occasional handling issues with the little Olympus in that I still find myself pushing two buttons at the same time or forgetting my settings (wish it had a second LCD screen so that information showed constantly) but despite this, it is working out well for me. I also have added the Olympus 25/2.8 with a Panasonic Lumix adapter for micro 4/3. Those two lenses compare in focal length to my 35mm and 50mm lenses for the Leicas. Image quality is fine with both lenses. Complaints you generally get are about abberations and distortion. They are there but, in the vast majority of the cases, you won't notice them in your pictures. I shoot everything RAW and some corrections can be done with converting. I usually just let it go--it doesn't bother me. I do find the Olympus software to be pretty slow if I do a lot of corrections when converting the RAW images on my Mac Mini computer. Also, in regard to the lenses, I really wish for f/2 or faster optics. The Panasonic 20/1.7 is about all there is currently but the 40mm equivalent focal length simply doesn't appeal to me.
I use the 25mm lens with an old Leitz 50mm bright line finder. Although not an exact match to the 4:3 aspect ratio, it's more than acceptable for my use. I almost always turn off the LCD when using the 17 and 25mm lenses and use the optical viewfinders only. I also have the 14-42 zoom but it is so seldom used, it stays in a cabinet drawer at home. While the AF on the E-P1 is a little on the slow side, it's accurate and good enough for my purposes. I'm not a big action shooter and the E-P1 is not a camera for a lot of action shooting.
What was a disappointment was in using my Leica lenses on the E-P1. I can't manually focus for crap on the LCD holding the camera at arm's length. I also have a Panasonic G1 and it is much easier to use with manual focus despite the EVF being "different" and a little dodgy to use in comparison to a true optical VF. Still, if you intend to use adapted lenses on the micro 4/3 system, I'd definitely go with a camera with an EVF--one of the Panasonics or the Olympus models that allow the EVF accessory.
The E-P1 does have a complicated menu selection. That is a complaint heard over and over. It takes getting used to. The camera manual is virtually useless. I would suggest buying the Magic Lantern guide book for a better understanding of what the menus are about. Without it, I would have been totally frustrated. Once you decide how you want to use the camera and get it set up the way you want it, you can forget about the menus and just use the one-button quick menu to change your settings.
I'm very happy thus far with the E-P1 as a digital replacement for my Leicas. It's certainly not the same feel but it's more than acceptable as a "poor man's digital M". I expect I will get a second Olympus body in the future so I can carry two bodies with 35mm and 50mm equivalent focal lengths as I did when using my Leicas. I've never used the Panasonic GF-1 but I've read that it handles a bit better than the E-P1. I wanted the body-based IS of the Olympus, however. As far as I can tell, the IS does a very good job. I don't get a lot of pictures ruined by camera movement unless I'm careless or the shutter speed is unreasonable.
I cannot predict how you will respond to using either the E-P1 or the GF-1 as a replacement for your Leica. Until something better comes along (maybe that Fuji that was recently previewed), I'm pretty satisfied.
Prior to "going digital", the majority of my shooting was done with two M6 bodies, one fitted with a 35mm Summicron and a 50mm Summicron on the other. I carried a 21mm Voigtlander and a 90mm Elmar-C but they were only used on rare occasions. I shot B&W, however. That changed when I started shooting digital with a Canon SLR a few years ago. Now I'm about 99% all color, done digitally. I shoot some with my Canon DSLR but it's more specialized now. I started using a Canon G10 for most of my general photography prior to using micro 4/3 cameras. The G10 is a great little camera for image quality at low ISO but less so at the higher ISOs.
A digital M is not a financial alternative for me either. I recently retired and I need to watch my pennies. I would love a couple of M9 bodies but it ain't gonna happen so I ain't gonna sweat it.
A few months back, I bought an E-P1 with 17/2.8. While it took some getting used to, I have to admit it is replacing my Leicas in use. I'm more about ergonomics than absolute image quality. I do have some occasional handling issues with the little Olympus in that I still find myself pushing two buttons at the same time or forgetting my settings (wish it had a second LCD screen so that information showed constantly) but despite this, it is working out well for me. I also have added the Olympus 25/2.8 with a Panasonic Lumix adapter for micro 4/3. Those two lenses compare in focal length to my 35mm and 50mm lenses for the Leicas. Image quality is fine with both lenses. Complaints you generally get are about abberations and distortion. They are there but, in the vast majority of the cases, you won't notice them in your pictures. I shoot everything RAW and some corrections can be done with converting. I usually just let it go--it doesn't bother me. I do find the Olympus software to be pretty slow if I do a lot of corrections when converting the RAW images on my Mac Mini computer. Also, in regard to the lenses, I really wish for f/2 or faster optics. The Panasonic 20/1.7 is about all there is currently but the 40mm equivalent focal length simply doesn't appeal to me.
I use the 25mm lens with an old Leitz 50mm bright line finder. Although not an exact match to the 4:3 aspect ratio, it's more than acceptable for my use. I almost always turn off the LCD when using the 17 and 25mm lenses and use the optical viewfinders only. I also have the 14-42 zoom but it is so seldom used, it stays in a cabinet drawer at home. While the AF on the E-P1 is a little on the slow side, it's accurate and good enough for my purposes. I'm not a big action shooter and the E-P1 is not a camera for a lot of action shooting.
What was a disappointment was in using my Leica lenses on the E-P1. I can't manually focus for crap on the LCD holding the camera at arm's length. I also have a Panasonic G1 and it is much easier to use with manual focus despite the EVF being "different" and a little dodgy to use in comparison to a true optical VF. Still, if you intend to use adapted lenses on the micro 4/3 system, I'd definitely go with a camera with an EVF--one of the Panasonics or the Olympus models that allow the EVF accessory.
The E-P1 does have a complicated menu selection. That is a complaint heard over and over. It takes getting used to. The camera manual is virtually useless. I would suggest buying the Magic Lantern guide book for a better understanding of what the menus are about. Without it, I would have been totally frustrated. Once you decide how you want to use the camera and get it set up the way you want it, you can forget about the menus and just use the one-button quick menu to change your settings.
I'm very happy thus far with the E-P1 as a digital replacement for my Leicas. It's certainly not the same feel but it's more than acceptable as a "poor man's digital M". I expect I will get a second Olympus body in the future so I can carry two bodies with 35mm and 50mm equivalent focal lengths as I did when using my Leicas. I've never used the Panasonic GF-1 but I've read that it handles a bit better than the E-P1. I wanted the body-based IS of the Olympus, however. As far as I can tell, the IS does a very good job. I don't get a lot of pictures ruined by camera movement unless I'm careless or the shutter speed is unreasonable.
I cannot predict how you will respond to using either the E-P1 or the GF-1 as a replacement for your Leica. Until something better comes along (maybe that Fuji that was recently previewed), I'm pretty satisfied.
Black
Photographer.
I sold my M6 classic to get an E-P2. Biggest regret ever. And now, it will be a long, long time before I can afford an M again. Think long and hard over it. Sometimes, as tempting as the instant gratification that digital can provide is, once you are used to using a rangefinder and the intuitive simplicity of using one, the bells and whistles of a shiny new digital, can be, for me at the very least, a damp squib.
And I won't even enter into the debate of why I find shooting analogue more rewarding digital.
Except that, I suppose, I just did.
And I won't even enter into the debate of why I find shooting analogue more rewarding digital.
Except that, I suppose, I just did.
P
Peter S
Guest
You will miss the viewfinder and the ergonomics I think. At least I did when I was looking for the same holy grail. I would definitely wait for the new Fuji x100 if you are now only shooting with a 35 summicron and therefore actually may not need an interchangeable lens system. I have tried both Panasonic and Olympus m4/3 camera's and just did not like the composing with the LCD screen. An EVF adds extra cost and also suddenly makes it a bulky package. Try it in a shop, the feeling does not even come close.
DNG
Film Friendly
I have an M5, and DSLR, but, I too wanted a camera that use my RF glass on. I have a CV 28/1.9 ASPH and a ZM 50/1.5 C-Sonnar. Both work great on a G1
w/28mm
with 50mm
I have the 17 also, that I will sell to help finance the Fuji X100..
I really like the IQ of the G1, and you can get very usable image at ISO 800 with a good NR program.. I use Neat Image Pro.
I would think twice about selling your Leica. If, like me, you had a windfall to buy it, it may be a long time before you have around $1k to replace it later on. BUT, if the film expense is killing you, It is a tough dission to make, and will you have sellers remorse afterwords. But, You must adjust to what you can afford to spend on a hobby.
I would look at a G1 or G2 personally, I like the bit bulkier and more familiar SLR type body for Viewing and holding, when using adapted lenses... Plus, the tilt/swivel LCD is a nice option for Hip Framing,.Although the pop-on EVF is just as useful.
I can say that the CV 28mm's and the CV 35mm's (either LTM/M mounts) work fine on a G1.
But for true 28/35/40 fov, get the OEM lenses (Panny 14, 20mm, Oly 17mm)
Although for just over $120.00, you could get BW developing gear. (I just did)
And use both, Film and Digital at your whim.
I 'm guessing you have a scanner already.
Enjoy
w/28mm
with 50mm
I have the 17 also, that I will sell to help finance the Fuji X100..
I really like the IQ of the G1, and you can get very usable image at ISO 800 with a good NR program.. I use Neat Image Pro.
I would think twice about selling your Leica. If, like me, you had a windfall to buy it, it may be a long time before you have around $1k to replace it later on. BUT, if the film expense is killing you, It is a tough dission to make, and will you have sellers remorse afterwords. But, You must adjust to what you can afford to spend on a hobby.
I would look at a G1 or G2 personally, I like the bit bulkier and more familiar SLR type body for Viewing and holding, when using adapted lenses... Plus, the tilt/swivel LCD is a nice option for Hip Framing,.Although the pop-on EVF is just as useful.
I can say that the CV 28mm's and the CV 35mm's (either LTM/M mounts) work fine on a G1.
But for true 28/35/40 fov, get the OEM lenses (Panny 14, 20mm, Oly 17mm)
Although for just over $120.00, you could get BW developing gear. (I just did)
And use both, Film and Digital at your whim.
I 'm guessing you have a scanner already.
Enjoy
DNG
Film Friendly
You got that right, the G1 or EP-1 will never have the same feel as a True full-size RF, The X100 will have a similar RF feel by brilliant design on Fuji's R&D
ampguy
Veteran
In the above example shots, the bright colors look like they have diffraction induced noise. Something I don't get with the M8, unless stopping way down or very high ISO, and that I see less of on APS-C shots, where they are in almost all u4/3 shots with bright lights, bright colors.
DNG
Film Friendly
I used f/5.6 or f/8 mostly....,
I don't expect a $250.00 camera that has a 2x crop factor to EVER compare to a $4k 1.3x crop camera... EVER!
But, for what is offers, it does a fine job, and offers a good balance of cost/value/IQ within it's limits.
now, the 1st image (28mm Ultron f/1.9 ASPH) would be the widest I shoot with adapted lenses..not, perfect, but a usable 48mm fov with suitable lighting., I have not used this one below f/8 or so on the G1. But with 50mm... not a problem... Also, the CV 28mm is much cooler than the Zeiss warmer colors, as the images show., Also, I did use the built in flash on the 28mm image, which may have washed out the colors a bit, but, still a decent image non-the-less.
W/ u4/3, and under 50mm lenses, using a very small f/stop at your on risk.
250swb
Well-known
fotomik, an M6 and a 35mm Summicron? Don't even think of an EP1 or EP2 or GF1. Just wait. Soon we will know what the Fuji X100 can do, and it should fit your bill perfectly with any luck.
Steve
Steve
kshapero
South Florida Man
The Fuji X100 might be the answer, but still limited to one lens.
Clancycoop
Established
As soon as I got an M6 my EP-1 was literally never used again. I sold it.
I found I liked everything about it except using it to take pictures. It felt too P&S-ish, even though the IQ is way better.
I found I liked everything about it except using it to take pictures. It felt too P&S-ish, even though the IQ is way better.
fotomik
Member
Excellent answers, and some very good points.
Just to clarify: The M6 is NEVER going to be sold. You guys have absolutely NO idea what I went through to buy the thing... Never ever am I going to sell that.
But I'm a bit surprised at all the negative comments, I would've thought that the EP-2 would get more love over here. ;D
The X100 is probably not going to be my camera, as it lacks the IS, which I AM going to want in my Year 2010/2011 digital wondertoy. Also I'm not going to sink 1000€ to a first generation Fujifilm digicam. I've sold them, I've used them, I'm not convinced they can get it even close to "right" on the first go. The X102 maybe, in 10 years.
Just to clarify: The M6 is NEVER going to be sold. You guys have absolutely NO idea what I went through to buy the thing... Never ever am I going to sell that.
But I'm a bit surprised at all the negative comments, I would've thought that the EP-2 would get more love over here. ;D
The X100 is probably not going to be my camera, as it lacks the IS, which I AM going to want in my Year 2010/2011 digital wondertoy. Also I'm not going to sink 1000€ to a first generation Fujifilm digicam. I've sold them, I've used them, I'm not convinced they can get it even close to "right" on the first go. The X102 maybe, in 10 years.
Warren T.
Well-known
Hi Fotomik,
Yes, there are some very dedicated m4/3 haters/naysayers on RFF
.
I'm not one of them. The format works for me. You should try it yourself, if you are interested.
--Warren
Lumix G1 w/ Leitz 50mm f2.8 Elmar
Lumix G1 w/ Lumix 20mm f1.7
Yes, there are some very dedicated m4/3 haters/naysayers on RFF
.I'm not one of them.
The format works for me. You should try it yourself, if you are interested.--Warren
Lumix G1 w/ Leitz 50mm f2.8 Elmar
Lumix G1 w/ Lumix 20mm f1.7
Dogman
Veteran
Same here. Even though I'm not using my M6's now, I will not sell them.
Leigh Youdale
Well-known
I'm Disappointed Too
I'm Disappointed Too
I bought a GF1 thinking it was the answer to a maiden's prayer and I should embrace digital, and when I couldn't cope without a viewfinder I added the EVF. I bought the kit zoom with it. Too bulky with zoom and EVF attached now. Takes good quality pics but the handling, complexity and the awkwardness of using manual legacy lenses on it compared to using the M6 or Bessa have made it a shelf-sitter. I'll keep it for the odd occasion when it is the most convenient thing to use and set it to auto-everything but I've been very tempted to sell it.
I'm Disappointed Too
I bought a GF1 thinking it was the answer to a maiden's prayer and I should embrace digital, and when I couldn't cope without a viewfinder I added the EVF. I bought the kit zoom with it. Too bulky with zoom and EVF attached now. Takes good quality pics but the handling, complexity and the awkwardness of using manual legacy lenses on it compared to using the M6 or Bessa have made it a shelf-sitter. I'll keep it for the odd occasion when it is the most convenient thing to use and set it to auto-everything but I've been very tempted to sell it.