I'm done with zoom lenses and AF - long live fast primes and manual focus!

I agree with the OP. With the exception of action photography (which includes everything from sports to family snaps) I operte my LUMIX G1 much like I used my ZI-M rangefinder. The LUMIX 20/1.7 lens is quite convenient for manual focus and manual exposure use. I also use Nikkor AI/AIS (35/2.0, 50/1.4) lenses occasionally. The kit zoom is fixed at 14 mm with gaffer's tape and for now it takes on the role of the 28/3.5 Color Skopar I used on the ZI-M.
 
"I agree with the OP. With the exception of action photography (which includes everything from sports to family snaps) I operte my LUMIX G1 much like I used my ZI-M rangefinder. "

I don't understand the need by folks on this forum to buy wonderful bits of technology and then dumb them down because of some repulsion for the same. Gaffer's tape to make the zoom a 14mm? Oh, good grief. If you want something that works like your ZI-M rangefinder, use one! The 4/3 cameras are kinda cool, but no amount of pretending is going to turn one into an M9!
 
If you put Bill and Roger together, you could use them instead of Baking Soda and Vinegar for those Volcano 5th grade Science Fair Projects.
 
Pickett Wilson said:
I don't understand the need by folks on this forum to buy wonderful bits of technology and then dumb them down because of some repulsion for the same.
Click to expand...

I don't think the OP was necessarily 'repulsed' by technology. He said:

"No more plastic, ugly looking, super slow AF Zooms!"

Certainly the Angenieux 25/0.95 build quality is much superior than modern technological marvels made of plastic that are ugly and slow. I agree with him on this. The 25mm also happens to be a nice piece of glass. 🙂

There is a reason for the text 'modern vintage' under my avatar. The E-P2 and the Angenieux is one great example of that combination.
 
Maybe I'm asking the questions (that I asked in Post 19) in the wrong thread? No one seems inclined to answer even one of them. Is there another thread dealing with this new camera? If so, please re-direct me.

Or I'm in the right place but no one has a clue?
 
tedwhite said:
3. With a 4/3 sensor, how large can one make a respectable print?
Click to expand...

How large do you need to print?

Seriously, if we are talking about a large print, like 16x20 inches or bigger, if you can tell the size of the sensor from the quality of the print, you're looking at it too closely. 🙂
 
It's an honest question, and with film cameras partially a function of neg size and lens quality. I'm thinking of the old Pen half-frames and, as I think of it, the XA, both of which would make decent 8X10's but not much larger. I don't know about 4/3 sensors, which is why I was asking. How large can I go with my printer? 13X19", but I'd be happy with 11X14.

As I re-read your post, I gather that the size of the sensor is not an issue?
 
tedwhite said:
OK, hubris it is, but what about this new black EPL-2 with the attachable viewfinder? There's a lot I don't understand about this camera.
Click to expand...
An EPL-2 doesn't exist yet. There's the Olympus E-P2 (the one I own, pictured below), the Olympus E-P1, Panasonic GF-1 and the forthcoming Olympus E-PL1 (the consumer model)
4181349681_77e51063a7.jpg


tedwhite said:
1. It's supposed accept most primes, Leica M-mount, M39 screwmount, maybe others. But how does this work? What kind of lens mount does the camera have? Probably an adapter is required. What type and who makes it?
Click to expand...
All those cameras I mentioned are micro4/3 cameras, i.e. they use the micro4/3 lens mount. Adapters are available for a mass of lenses, e.g. for Leica M, Leica M39/LSM, Olympus OM. Google for "ebay micro4/3 adapter" and you'll find the types and makes.
An example is the Leica M39/LSM adapter from Votländer:
4182109986_92e8cd79cd.jpg


tedwhite said:
2. How does the viewfinder work? Does it simply see through whatever lens is attached and "view" accordingly?
Click to expand...
The attachable viewfinder of the E-P2 is an electronic viewfinder - an "EVF" - i.e. you see the same as the sensor and the lcd on the back of the camera sees. And this works for every lens that is attached. The micro4/3 cameras are like DSLR but without the mirror.

tedwhite said:
3. With a 4/3 sensor, how large can one make a respectable print?
Click to expand...
It's a micro4/3 sensor, not a 4/3 sensor - see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micro_Four_Thirds_system for explanations.

tedwhite said:
I am intrigued by the camera as it appears ALL my rf lenses might fit. If so, am I looking at a poor man's M8?
Click to expand...
I'm no fan of those analogies. The E-P2 is, from my point of view, simply the camera I always wanted:
Small, a pleasure to use with manual lenses, the best EVF, very good low light capabilities and great output.
4193204702_33dcbcec11.jpg
 
An EPL-2 doesn't exist yet. There's the Olympus E-P2 (the one I own, pictured below), the Olympus E-P1, Panasonic GF-1 and the forthcoming Olympus E-PL1 (the consumer model)
Click to expand...

Er, you forgot the G1, the first u4/3 camera. And the GH-1, its video-enabled big brother. Both of these should be included in the stable of u4/3 cameras if you're going to start naming names.


It's a micro4/3 sensor, not a 4/3 sensor - see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micro_Four_Thirds_system for explanations.
Click to expand...

Er, they're the same sensor; the lens mount and flange distance is what's the main difference between the two formats.

~Joe

Postscript: Nice images, BTW

G1, 20mm-f/1.7 Lumix prime:
P1060915sq.jpg
 
Last edited:
tedwhite said:
It's an honest question, and with film cameras partially a function of neg size and lens quality. I'm thinking of the old Pen half-frames and, as I think of it, the XA, both of which would make decent 8X10's but not much larger. I don't know about 4/3 sensors, which is why I was asking. How large can I go with my printer? 13X19", but I'd be happy with 11X14.

As I re-read your post, I gather that the size of the sensor is not an issue?
Click to expand...

Ted, when we're talking about film, the difference of sizes are in order of magnitudes, 35mm is tiny compared to 6x9 negative, for instance.

But when we're talking about 4/3rd vs APS vs 35mm (full frame), we are talking about at most 2x reduction in size.

I have seen a 16x20 print hanging on the wall from a 4/3rd sensor (as others have pointed out, the same as the micro-4/3rd). At that size, color balance and sharpness plays a bigger role than noise.

I can send you a photo from my E-P2 to try out on your printer if you want to see for yourself.
 
I agree with the OP. The AF zooms have a lot of compromises opically, ergonomics and build quality.

Nikon, for instance, took a major step backwards for about 2 decades with their AFD and G lenses, and are slowly catching up with the higher end AFS ones, but they still don't equal the quality of the first AI/AIS zooms like the 12 element 80-200 fixed f4.5 zoom.

An exception to AF with primes is the Hexar AF, which you can collimate yourself to your liking. By default, it's adjusted to approximate a Leica with Summicron 35/2, but you can very easily tweak to perfection.
 
Roger Hicks said:
I like Bill too, otherwise he'd be on ignore. It's just that sometimes he seems to WANT to be disliked. Sorry to disappoint him...

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

Yes, a Clever and DEVIOUS plan!

Of course, Bill does not care if people like him or dislike him and will probably set me straight in this post and point out that he does not care if I make the statement or do not make the statement, but as it is about him him he has to make a statement about it. or not.
 
Bottom line, I really like the OP's photos.

The look of this lens is really nice which is generally why I buy a camera, when I see something I like coming out of it and it meets my needs, small and nicely designed. This along with the 17mm Olympus lens make the EP1 or EP2 make my short list if I decide to try digital again.
 
Thanks you guys for the answers to my questions. I may not be smarter, but I'm better informed.

Will (Shadowfox) yes, send me the photo from your EP-2. My email is hypochek@gmail.com. Deeply appreciated.

Ted
 
tedwhite said:
OK, hubris it is, but what about this new black EPL-2 with the attachable viewfinder? There's a lot I don't understand about this camera.

1. It's supposed accept most primes, Leica M-mount, M39 screwmount, maybe others. But how does this work? What kind of lens mount does the camera have? Probably an adapter is required. What type and who makes it?

2. How does the viewfinder work? Does it simply see through whatever lens is attached and "view" accordingly?

3. With a 4/3 sensor, how large can one make a respectable print?

I am intrigued by the camera as it appears ALL my rf lenses might fit. If so, am I looking at a poor man's M8?
Click to expand...

Ted,

1. Yes, the MFT (Micro Four Thirds) cameras will accept M and M39 lenses and many others with a 2X crop factor. You will need the proper adapter MFT to whatever lens mount you want to use. This works because of the short back focus distance (distance from the lens mount to the sensor) of the MFT bodies. Any lens with longer back focus will work with the proper adapter.

2. The electronic viewfinder is basically a small LCD that shows the live view from the sensor as seen through whatever lens is mounted.

3. I have printed 11x14 and larger (24X36) using some digital magic.

I would not go so far as calling it a M8, but MFT cameras give a very high quality image from a small and very adaptable camera. I find my GF1 a joy to use. Bravo Olympus and Panasonic!

Mike
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom