M mount on GF1?

S

Steve B

Established
Local time
3:15 AM
Joined
Dec 18, 2005
Messages
159
Location
Bishop, CA
View My Gallery
Hi all, I've just become aware of the upcoming Lumix GF1 and the fact that Cameraquest has adaptors that allow M mount lenses to be used on the Micro Four Thirds system. I think its really exciting and am wondering what other's thoughts are on the performance of CV glass on the Lumix. I've wanted a digital rangefinder ever since they came out and am hoping that the GF1 will be a good companion to my M6 at rather a bit less money than the other digital options. I'm also hoping that the optional EVF will be good enough to focus with as I dislike holding a camera at arm's length and viewing with the LCD. Alternatively should I just suck it up and get an R-D1, and have the service issues with Epson improved any over the years? Sorry, kind of 2 questions in one post I guess.
 
The GF1 is basically the same camera as the G1. It will accept M mount lenses with adapter. I have not been happy with the performance of M glass on the G1. For me, nothing works better then the lenses that were designed for the camera. The Lumix lenses are quite good performers. I don't like my M glass focal lengths doubled anyway when mounting on the G1 or GF1 or EP1. I like wide angles to be wide angles, not medium focal lengths.

I know other people like their M glass on 4/3 cameras. Your mileage may vary.
 
The key question is how good is the EVF. Initial report/comments are not overly favourable.

However, I am thinking only using the 20mm with a 35/40mm optical viewfinder...let the camera auto-focus [and focus-lock] do their jobs. Just point and shoot, as it was meant to be.

Elsewhere I read a 14mm is on its way, plus a 45mm already in existence, the 3 lens outfit [all Leica glass] is available. and will cost less than whatever Solms/Wetzlar charge.😀
 
Good thoughts. I do remind myself, though, that with the EVF we're really comparing it to the crappy tunnel vision optical finders on other compact digitals. It doesn't seem to me that it can be much worse. I like the idea of using the optical finder though. I'll likely leave the 20 f1.7 on the camera much of the time but I hope the zoom (and other lenses) will be available as well. I just like the idea of being able to swap lenses with the M6 and will probably get the adapter just for fun if I go ahead with this camera.
 
i have a g1 and love it. i had an adapter to use my m lenses on it - but sold it.
i'm with keith in that i prefer the panasonic lenses on the g1 and while i can't really complain about the m lenses on the g1, i have to admit i much prefer them on the rd1.

the rd1 was the best rf move i have made.
 
I like the concept of the GF1. It's rangefinder-esque. And I thought about getting one to use M lenses on but most of them would be telephoto. Which makes it kind of useless.

From the samples I've seen on flickr and various forums. I think the photos look great. But such a narrow FOV really limits practical usage. Unless you have a wide angle tri-elmar, it's just a curio.
 
Making the lenses Telephoto is precisely why I prefer m43. I just laugh at other sport photographers lugging around 300mm lenses with huge flash setups and tri-pods, then sit right on the sidelines praying for the action to come to them. My plastic lightweight 50mm Nikon 1.8D becomes 100mm with 2x the depth of field. Not to mention the vignetting and distortion at the edge of the lens is eliminated due to the crop. It is a true low light solution for any kind of action shooting. The 2x "crop factor" is probably the best they can do to maximize depth of field without running into CoC blur using existing lenses. I could careless about bokeh and other artsy effects, that's why god invented photoshop.
 
Frankie said:
Elsewhere I read a 14mm is on its way, plus a 45mm already in existence, the 3 lens outfit [all Leica glass] is available. and will cost less than whatever Solms/Wetzlar charge.😀
Click to expand...

14mm (28 equiv) on it way for micro 4/3? Where'd you see this? Aperture? Size?
 
14-42mm is the kit lens that's included with the Pen. My only gripe with it is when you zoom the aperture increases (f3.5-5.6). Regardless, it did replace my Nikon F2.8D 35-70mm lens in the bag (it's too heavy and big to lug around vs. just going with my 50mm).
 
kbg32 said:
The GF1 is basically the same camera as the G1. It will accept M mount lenses with adapter. I have not been happy with the performance of M glass on the G1. For me, nothing works better then the lenses that were designed for the camera. The Lumix lenses are quite good performers. I don't like my M glass focal lengths doubled anyway when mounting on the G1 or GF1 or EP1. I like wide angles to be wide angles, not medium focal lengths.

I know other people like their M glass on 4/3 cameras. Your mileage may vary.
Click to expand...

I love the two Panasonic lenses I have--the kit lens is great, and the 45-200mm is very nice considering how compact and inexpensive it is. My other favorite lenses so far are the 28mm Summicron and the Noctilux. I think I will like the 75mm and 90mm Summicrons especially. Have not had a chance to use them yet. However, they will be very fast moderate telephotos (sort of) and I think the edge performance will be much better than with the wider lenses.

I'm also excited about the GF1 and will be tempted, although another G1 body might accomplish the same purpose for me. (Maybe I can get one of those BLUE ones 🙂) If the G1 starts to grow on me to the point where I want to do a serious shoot with only that format, then I would want a second body in the bag, and it could be a G1 or GF1.

I have not been "unhappy" with my M lenses on my G1. At the moment, Leica and CV make (for example) some very fine fast lenses in M mounts, and Panasonic does not. The edge performance of the wider Leica/CV lenses on a G1 is enough off so you can see it, no question. So, especially if you already own M mount lenses, the G1 is a nice place to use them along with the new specially designed lenses for m4/3. I don't know that one would want to buy something like a CV 35mm f/1.2 in order to mainly use it on a G1 or GF1.

The forthcoming 20mm f/1.7 from Panasonic has no equivalent from Leica or CV. I think I will like it although (judging from my short experience with the Olympus 17mm f/2.8 for the E-P1) I will not be blown away. My mind drifts back to the Olympus OM equipment I used and loved so much. I prized compactness (and moderate prices) and was happy. However, there are a lot of compromises optically when building fast, compact lenses with fewer elements, and I can see the difference. I think the Panasonic 20mm will be appropriate for the camera in every way. I would not expect it to be as good as a 40mm or 50mm Summicron or CV on a 35mm camera.

I have used a 25mm Summilux (the size and weight of a partially full beer can) on my G1, and now that is a combination that makes some nice images. It looks funny, but obviously the pictures it takes are just as good as with the same lens on a clunkier, heavier, 4/3 body. If you take that lens and remove lots of the glass elements that reduce aberrations, improve close-focusing performance, and so on, and thereby shrink it and make it less expensive, you are heading in the direction of the Panasonic 20mm.

By the way, I'm very intrigued with what I've heard about that 45mm Leica-designed macro lens for the micro-4/3 mount.

Tom

PS A lot of exciting news in the air, in my opinion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom