Likea Leica?

[Aurance]

Its reality time and it looks like a Leica M9 is ‘way’ beyond my budget but I want to make the investment in Leica M Lenses. I want a small ‘everyday camera’ with small lenses, lightweight and great IQ v noise up to ISO:800.

My start-up Leica Lens kit is as follows:-

• Panasonic GF1 Camera
• Panasonic External Viewfinder
• Panasonic DMW-MA2ME – Leica M lens Adaptor
• Leica 28mm (56mm FOV) f2 ASPH Summicron-M 6 Bit Lens
• Leica 50mm (100mm FOV) f1.4 ASPH Summilux-M 6-bit Lens

I figured that the GF1 body could be replaced much later with an M9 or perhaps a M10?

I have read what little reviews are available in relation to the GF1 and Leica M Lenses. A good review link would be most welcomed?

My understanding of my start-up kit - all that I lose is the autofocus function of the camera and the depth of field of a ‘full frame’ sensor camera? I can live with the tighter ‘field of view’ of both the Leica Lenses (for now).

I welcome any advice, shared experience of my start-up kit, the good the bad and the ugly?

Many thanks in advance.


Richard

 

[jarski]

there are many fans of M4/3's body and M-lenses combo here, but also those after experimenting sold their adapters, and use these systems separately as they were meant.
before investing a lot, start conservatively, try if you can play with the combo somewhere (I know it can be hard).

 

[Pickett Wilson]

"My understanding of my start-up kit - all that I lose is the autofocus function of the camera and the depth of field of a ‘full frame’ sensor camera?"

Why not spend the extra money and get an M8 to use those lenses on? You are about to drop a bunch of money on the two lenses you are going to buy, and then cobbling them onto a camera not designed - or optimized - for their use. IMHO, of course.

 

[JPSuisse]

Yes, I see it the same way as Pickett.

Also, the smallest FOV (56mm) would be way too long for me.

At it's best, the M-system is used closer up, and if that's the shortest FOV, I don't think I'd like that.

If I bought a such a camera, I'd probably put the 21mm Biogon on it from Zeiss. I use it on my M8 and it's a fabulous lens as well.

Just my 2 cents.

JP

 

[Trius]

And using white text to post here is not such a great idea.

 

[Jarle Aasland]

Here's a great GF1 review by Steve Huff (who's also an M9 shooter):

http://www.stevehuffphotos.com/Steve_Huff_Photos/THE_PANASONIC_GF1_REVIEW.html

His conclusion (part of it): "A month or two ago, I would have predicted the GF1 to be “average” but after testing it out, I have been proven wrong. If you are looking for a terrific digital camera under $1000 and want to keep it semi-compact, then I can not think of a better solution than the Panasonic GF1."

Jarle

 

[Pickett Wilson]

Yeah, the GF1 is an incredible camera. But I'm not sure it makes sense to buy it to adapt manual focus Leica lenses to. Everyone has their own priorities, though.

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

The GF1 is great, but if it's M lenses you want to shoot, get an M8. The GF1's crop factor is quite extreme, and wide lenses in M mount render soft in the corners.

I have been using Olympus Pen lenses on the GF1, and they seem to me to be the closest thing to "native" manual focus lenses on micro four thirds. The M adapter I bought doesn't get much use, and when I want to shoot those lenses on digital I pick up the R-D1.

 

[Keyne]

G1 or Rd1

G1 or Rd1

Just one question, why would you want the GF1 instead of a G1? I considered the GF1 but really wanted a viewfinder so I went with the G1 kit which is a lot cheaper than a GF1 (I got mine for $640 with the kit 14-45) and has a much better EVF. Also, from a form factor perspective once you add the viewfinder you are getting even closer to a G1. The G1 is basically the same body as the GF1 with an EVF attached to it plus a hand grip.

If I had the money to buy a GF1 plus the viewfinder, adapter, and the lenses you mentioned; I would have bought an Epson Rd1 or waited for an M8. You could get a used Epson Rd1 for the same price you are talking for the GF1 kit, and you get a nice digital range finder. Personally I think that is the most "Leica Like" of them all. If only I could have purchased that for the same amount as a G1 kit... however at the time I hadnt even thought about a Digital RF... however my investigation of MF lenses for the G1 led me here. Now I lust for one. Anyway, thats a bit off topic.... LOL

However, if you are interested in MFT and MF lenses, the link below is very interesting. He compares an M9 to a G1, and has a very nice gallery of G1 photos with MF lenses.

http://www.zoomview.it/page x slideshow 3.html

Also, if you are looking for a good discussion on MFT the link to the forum below at DPReview is a really great place to start.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/forum.asp?forum=1041

 

[Tikkis]

• Leica 28mm (56mm FOV) f2 ASPH Summicron-M 6 Bit Lens

Richard

A word of caution. I had very similar ideas, getting few HQ Leica lenses with E-P1 and living happily ever after. I bought brand new Summarit-M 2,5/50 mm and Elmarit-M 2,8/28 mm (Asph.).

The Summarit is a really nice lens and works like a charm, beautiful Bokeh etc. The Elmarit gave me a huge disappointment -- the lens is good -- but it just doesn't work properly with 4/3 cell.

The distance from focal point of the lens to the corner is much longer than to the center of the cell. That leads to light fall-off and less than optimum sharpness.

Of course you can somewhat compensate this by using the smaller apertures -- but why then buy top quality lenses that work like a charm also with full aperture.

No, my bitter experience is that these kind of classical (more-or-less) symmetrical wideangles just don't work with 4/3 cell.

If one wants to use wa-lenses, the best alternatives are retrofocus wideangles made for SLR cameras or lenses that are specifically made for 4/3.

Cheers,

Tikkis

 

[retow]

Used M8 is the way to go, if it has to be two lenses. Or used M8 plus cron 28 only.
With the money your set up would cost you could almost buy an M9 plus one lens eg used cron 35mm, Summarit or ZM 35, wich would be way preferable an option. I have an M8 and a GF1 as well, but do not enjoy using M lenses on the m4/3. Crop factor, inferior IQ, cumbersome mf (in comparison). The GF1 is nice with m4/3 or legacy lenses.

 

[Photon42]

I have a G1 and I believe it's not a good platform for Leica M-Lenses in general. I use it occasionally for close-up and telephoto, things the Leica M doesn't excel in. Lenses from about 50mm work fine, I found, so a 90 Summicron is effectively quite nice to use.

 

[mfogiel]

Instead of spending all that money on the most expensive lenses and pairing them with a limiting camera and small sensor, get the M9 and put a couple of Jupiters on it, the results will be far better.

 

[Aurance]

Thanks for all the excellent replies - I will be delaying my purchase - the M9+Leica 28mm Summicron are worth waiting another year for (time to save up).

Sorry about the white text in my orginal post - I cut/pasted text from my Word editor and then chose the wrong text colour in the rangefinder forum text editor.

Cheers

Richard

 

[jsrockit]

Instead of spending all that money on the most expensive lenses and pairing them with a limiting camera and small sensor, get the M9 and put a couple of Jupiters on it, the results will be far better.

I agree... but step up to Voigtlander...

 

[BearCatCow]

Thanks for all the excellent replies - I will be delaying my purchase - the M9+Leica 28mm Summicron are worth waiting another year for (time to save up).

Sorry about the white text in my orginal post - I cut/pasted text from my Word editor and then chose the wrong text colour in the rangefinder forum text editor.

Cheers

Richard

I recommend getting the M8 or the Epson R-D1 if your budget allows for it. These digital rangefinders allow you to have a proper optical viewfinder. With a GF1 manual focus will not be as quick as can be achieved on a native range finder focusing window. Also a used M8 or R-D1 will be much closer to the experience of using the M9 later on.

GF1 looks like a great great camera but for your purpose I don't think it's the right tool for the job.