Is the G1 a rangefinder?

Is the G1 a rangefinder?

  • Yes! It's as much a rangefinder as any other RF camera.

    Votes: 4 8.2%

  • Well, it is adaptable to RF lenses, so what's the problem?

    Votes: 9 18.4%

  • No, I don't see a rangefinder anywhere on the camera.

    Votes: 32 65.3%

  • I wouldn't touch this debate with a ten foot pole!

    Votes: 4 8.2%
  • Total voters
    49
I'll admit that the G1 interests me as well, but not for the M lens capability. I have seen an FD adapter and if one really is available, then I'll get the camera & one of those.

To me it's not a RF & not really needed as a means to use my RF lenses. OTOH, as a SLR to use my orphaned SLR lenses? Now that I can possibly enjoy.

William
 
Well, I don't see a rangefinder anywhere on the camera, but it's adaptable to RF lenses, so what's the problem?

That would have been my vote.

Cheers,
Uwe
 
Pitxu said:
You don't even need the "micro" 4/3 for that.
Quite a few different SLR lenses are adaptable for the FULL 4/3 format, eg: Olympus E-420.
Click to expand...

To my understanding, micro-4/3 is the first to offer infinity focus without lenses in the adapter. Please point at an alternative if I am wrong :)

William
 
I think what Pitxu is saying is that if you want to use SLR lenses you don't necessarily need a micro 4/3, the regular 4/3 will work fine. In fact, you won't need the Panasonic DMW-MA1 4/3 to micro 4/3 adapter if you go that route which saves about $150.

Canon FD lenses work on any 4/3 camera using one of these adapters: http://tinyurl.com/8zjg2y

To use M lenses, you'll need micro 4/3.
 
digitalintrigue said:
Canon FD lenses work on any 4/3 camera using one of these adapters: http://tinyurl.com/8zjg2y
Click to expand...

I understand what Pitxu is saying. That adaptor does NOT allow for infinity focus for FD lenses on 4/3 mount cameras. Micro-4/3 is the first mount that apparently does. Until now there has been NO good way to use FD lenses on ANY digital camera; this is why the G1 is of interest to me. I'm much more interested in using my 35/2 Chrome Nose or my 50/1.4 SSC (or even to have a good excuse to buy a 24/2.8 SSC ;) ) on a digital than I would be any Leica lens, but that's just my preference.

William
 
Hmm, yep. Not sure what the point of an adapter is if it doesn't allow infinity. Both Rayqual and Novoflex have announced support for Canon FD on µ4/3.
 
It's neither a rangefinder nor an SLR

It's an ILDCS

Interchangeable
Lens
Digital
Camera
System

... and it's about time.

Or maybe we can call it a DILC - more of a ring...
 
Last edited:
Reading through this thread is disappointing ... I don't give a flying f**k who Fred Burton is in some people's minds and if you're right I still don't give a flying f**k frankly because none of the previous incarnations you seem to be associating this person with bothered me much at all. There are far more irritating people currently present on the forum who seem to 'fit' better and aren't regarded as grains of sand in RFF's wonderful mechanism by certain members. YMMV of course!

And how a question about a camera that will affect us greatly regarding our M mount lens usage, as Stephen pointed out, can be regarded as trolling ... mystifies me no less!
 
Last edited:
bmattock said:
That does not make it a less capable camera. It makes it not a rangefinder, in the same sense that a baseball and a football are both balls used for sports, but a baseball is not a football and vice-versa.
Click to expand...

Bill, when I shot with the help of a rangefinder in the 80s, something got hit by a 100 or 127mm shell and I have no pictures to proof it :)
 
CameraQuest said:
The Micro 4/3 forum is here at RFF because via adapters Micro 4/3 SLRs offer an inexpensive way to use rangefinder lenses on digital cameras.
Click to expand...

Micro 4/3 is an interesting technology, the G1 is a bit too SLR like for my liking. The faux mirror box for instance.
The Oly mock up is more like it, I wish for a compact system camera with interchangeable fast primes and zooms with a bigger sensor then what the current digital compacts have. The 4/3rd sensor is big enough IMHO. Sure, a 24x36 sensor would be better, but then the camera would be bigger and more expensive.
How focus is acquired is not so important as long as it's accurate and reasonably fast. Same goes for the viewfinder.
 
Keith said:
Reading through this thread is disappointing ... I don't give a flying f**k who Fred Burton is in some people's minds and if you're right I still don't give a flying f**k frankly because none of the previous incarnations you seem to be associating this person with bothered me much at all.
Click to expand...

Keith, you obviously care a lot, or you wouldn't bother posting this or saying f**k. Did you pm the moderators about this?

Keith said:
There are far more irritating people currently present on the forum who seem to 'fit' better and aren't regarded as grains of sand in RFF's wonderful mechanism by certain members. YMMV of course!
Click to expand...

I'm likely one of those irritating people. Sorry dude.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom