Some Questions about 4/3 Cameras

[rpilottx]

I presently have a couple classic film cameras (M4 and Nikon F) and a Canon S90. I have been debating adding a second M body but have a hard time buying more old technology (stunned at how good the S90 is) but I really like the classic M's.

I think $7000 for an M9 is bs but I might think about the X1. I can afford either but photography is only one of many hobbies. So instead of dropping a $1000 on another classic M, I have been thinking about a 4/3's camera that I can use some of my Leica glass on. I doubt the M9 is really seven times better in quality then either the Olympus or Panasonic.

Since there is not a camera store in El Paso, I have been spending a lot of time on the internet comparing the Panasonic and Olympus cameras and have a few questions: 1) It appears that the EVF for the EP2 is the way to go compared to the Panasonic. 2) Basically all my M lenses will fit with a 1.5 multiplication factor on either camera with the appropriate adopter. 3) Are there any advantages to the adopter Cameraquest sells at around $150 compared to the ones on Amazon for $50? 4) Probably looking at either the Oly or Panasonic with the fixed 17 or 20mm as I am not much of a fan of zooms.

And I want to make sure I have not offended any M9 owners. I am sure it is a great M but just not for me. All comments are welcome.

 

[splitimageview]

1) It appears that the EVF for the EP2 is the way to go compared to the Panasonic.

The G1 and GH1 EVFs are equal, at least, to the EP2/EPL1 viewfinder.

The viewfinder for the GF1 is not as good.

2) Basically all my M lenses will fit with a 1.5 multiplication factor on either camera with the appropriate adopter.

It's a 2.0 factor.

 

[gavinlg]

1. Yep the Oly EVF is much better than the GF1's, but that being said, the panasonics EVF is still useable if a bit small. The G1/G2/GH cameras EVF's are as good as the oly's

2. Incorrect, your M mount lenses will have a 2x multiplication factor on m4/3 bodies. To be honest you're nearly always better off using the native m4/3 lenses instead - they actually perform better than even leica/zeiss lenses on m4/3 cameras. For instance the 20mm f1.7 panasonic is superb, the 14mm f2.5 panasonic is very good and the 45mm panasonic-leica is superb.

3. Note 100% sure sorry

4. Get the panasonic 20mm with whatever body you decide - it's worth the extra money over the Oly 17mm/

 

[alejj]

I have an ep-2 with the panasonic 20 mm. I think it's a winning combination, but I tried the epl-1 and I think, overall better.
However, the quality is not comparable to that obtained with an M8.
Best Regards.

 

[Griffin]

It seems to me that the E-PL1 is the best value. You get in body stabilization, better EVF and built-in flash. This, of course, assuming that you don't want to have the DSLR lookalike in the form of the G1 etc.

 

[shadowfox]

And I want to make sure I have not offended any M9 owners. I am sure it is a great M but just not for me. All comments are welcome.

I think you're being extra nice there 🙂

I just plain love my E-P2. Coupled with the (ironically) Panasonic prime lens, it's just such a joy to use. The viewfinder is so useful when you have the time to use it.

The only other lens that I'm eyeing for it is the Olympus 9-18mm.

Crop factor of 2x is sometimes annoying, but you still can see the different renderings that the old lenses produce, and that to me is where the fun of using those anyways.

 

[JoeV]

There are really great deals these days on the Lumix G1, which is still a great camera, great control layout, great EVF. Don't let the form-factor throw you off, just because the G1 doesn't "look" like a rangefinder doesn't mean it's any less useful. More-so, IMO, due to its swivel LCD screen and great EVF. And great price.

As for the field-of-view multiplication factor of 2X, I've found it surprisingly good, for instance in street photography when you need more reach. I've been using my Minolta MD 50-1.7 on the G1, with good results. I also like the speed and bokeh of these fast lenses. Another sweet spot is indoors in dim light when you need to reach across a room, for instance in nightclubs or other venues, a 50mm lens at sub-F/2 aperture has the FOV of a 100mm lens at F/2.

~Joe

 

[rpilottx]

Six of one; half dozen of the other

Six of one; half dozen of the other

The jury is still out on the Oly vs Panasonic systems. I have called all around El Paso, ABQ, and Tuscon and cannot find a camera store which sells any of the 4/3 systems.

It seems that both systems are excellent with slightly different features (in camera IS vs better EVF etc) so I will be looking for a vendor where I can get my hands on both cameras.

Since I started out looking for another M, I am not really in much of a hurry. I am traveling in March and would like to have something by then. Does anyone know of a camera store in Phoenix which handles both?

 

[PrecisionCamera]

Try PrecisionCamera in Austin. 🙂 We carry both.

 

[usayit]

I shoot with M8/9 (formerly R-D1) and G1/EPL1. Here are just some of my thoughts.

* If you are looking for a digital replacement for your M4, there isn't any other choice other than the M8, M9 or R-D1. Rangefinder vs EVIL are very different user experiences. No market competition + niche market == expensive. Unfortunately.... If you like shooting with an M because its a rangefinder, you'll find the m4/3rds experience good but not 100% fulfilling your needs. IMO, the M8 can fulfill 80% of the M users needs out there... yes there are quirks (IR filters, crop sensor etc) but that's for another discussion. M8's have hit low prices lately. I know people who have decided to sell their Leica equipment to fund other systems.... nothing wrong with that either. Simply put the rising cost (falling US dollar) has placed much of the equipment out of reach and that outweighed the perceived benefits of using a Leica rangefinder.

* If your intention is to use adapted lenses (in my case M-mount and M42), I find it a requirement to have EVF. For me, focusing via the LCD is simply not a viable option.

* G1, GH1, E-P2 + VF-2, E-PL1 + VF-2 all provide the necessary quality EVF to focus manual lenses properly. The GF1 EVF is by comparison... utter crap. The E-PL1's LCD is not as good as the other choices but I haven't found it to be a concern since I only use it with autofocus'd native lenses.

* If your intention is to use adapted lenses, the Olympus bodies have the distinct advantage of in body Image Stabilization. IS + Noctilux or Summilux is a joy in low light. I also adapt very long focal lengths which IS works quite nicely.

* Many have reported issues adapting M-mount lenses that are shorter than 35mm focal lengths. Color shifts and loss of quality at the corners.

* Image quality of my G1 versus E-PL1. No question, I like the E-PL1 better. In good light, the difference becomes less apparent.

* Image quality of the samples I examined between the E-PL1 and E-P2 (back when I was doing my homework), I edged out preference to the E-PL1. (http://www.imaging-resource.com was one place for samples).

* If you like to do video, the GH1 should be your #1 choice for m4/3rds. Not an concern on my part.

* For native lenses, the E-P2 has better ergonomics.. dials. For adapted lenses, E-PL1 has a dedicated magnification button and I found the feature on the E-P2 a PITA to activate.

* I disagree with the previous generalization of native lenses producing better images than adapted M-lenses. For my lenses above 35mm in focal length, that simply isn't true.

* Don't expect to adapt your M-mount lenses and expect to "use" them in the same manner as you have on 35mm film. 2x crop factor will make you "relearn"... shoot differently.

* 2x crop factor can work for you. Dark high school symphonic performance that I went to see my niece perform. It was not planned. I did however happen to have my G1 handy and a noctilux on an M camera. Equiv FOV of 100mm f/1 lens and "relearning" to use it as a fast telephoto was actually a benefit. E-PL1 would have been even better..

* 2x crop factor can work against you. As mentioned 35mm or less doesn't seem to work well with M-mount lenses (not sure about retrofocus lenses). Any "vintage" lenses with "character" such as soft rendering, CA, etc... will be even more obvious on a crop sensor. I happen to like some of it.

* All m4/3rds cameras I have sampled are utterly useless in continuous mode. You can't simply "shoot away" like you would on a DSLR (I'm coming from a Canon 1dMarkII). You have to plan your shots very carefully and shutter very precisely. I would not recommend m4/3rds cameras for sports photographers.

* Remember Native m4/3rd lenses from Panasonic and Olympus are interchangeable. I am kinda liking some of the m4/3rd lens offerings from Panasonic... to be used on an Olympus.


After long decision process.... (as already known) chose the E-PL1. Price was good. In body image stabilization. VF-2 was excellent. Dedicated magnification button. Image quality better than competitors (of that time). On the other hand, it isn't a Leica rangefinder "replacement" but more of a supplement to my bag. The fact that it weighs very little was an added bonus. If I were not intending to adapt lenses, I would probably leaned more towards a Panasonic for its more comfortable shape (grip), faster AF, menu layout, flip out LCD, nicer LCD, etc...

 

[Frank Petronio]

I use a Panasonic G1 w the 20/1.7 and love it for what it is.

But after trying fun lens adapters, the zoom, and the EP-1, this is as far as I'm going with m4/3. It's been a great stopgap in between evolutionary steps -- the tiny sensors and the APS-C sensor cameras.

It's certainly no solution for ~seriously~ using your Leica lenses. And while none of these cameras is 9x better or worse than one another, the files from a M8 are clearly better, not only in resolution, but in tonal range, over the m4/3 files.

Of course, a $700 Nikon D90 makes a better file than an M8 but we can argue these points forever.

Personally I like the G1/20 because I can carry it everywhere and I can get a couple of years out of it.

 

[rpilottx]

Now A Mute Point

Now A Mute Point

Well, let's just say I crawfished on digital. Am giving my Canon S90 to my daughter and sticking with film. RAZOR had a very nice M2 for sale here last week and someone beat me to the punch. I ordered a BGN M2 from KEH with the intention of painting it black. Then I cancelled that order and began to think about a Micro 4/3 camera. I got a call from RAZOR about two hours ago and his M2 is now on the way to El Paso.

My decision process sometimes makes my wife crazy but I slowly arrive at a decision. I have owned a couple M2's in the past and looking forward to getting one in good condition as a backup for my M4.

Am taking my daughter to Istambul in late March. I am looking forward to traveling with two M's so I can shoot both black and white and color.

Thanks for all the input. The last couple posts were excellent and I learned a lot about the 4/3's systems. I hate living in a city of 800000 without a camera store. Of course, El Paso just became America's safest city which has some benefits. And for a thrill I can go across the river to Ciudad Juarez which is the world's most dangerous city.

 

[willie_901]

You made the right decision IMHO.

It should be noted that the u 4/3 DOF is twice that of 135 format (35mm film) all things being equal. This means the lovely LUMIX 20/1.7 has the DOF of a 3.4 lens. You will see many u 4/3 photos with selective DOF, but the lens is much closer to the subject compared ot a 135 format sensor.

Besides image quality (information in shadow areas primarily), this loss of DOF is the reason why I abandoned the u 4/3 system.

Also, the LUMIX lenses will automatically give a nicely magnified view for fine focus on LUMIX bodies in manual focus mode. This makes manual focusing quick and accurate (on the LUMIX G1 at least). The PEN bodies are very nice cameras, but I do not believe touching the focus ring on a LUMIX lens will instantly zoom for MF adjustment on those bodies. I found manual focusing using the G1 viewfinder with LUMIX lenses to be far superior to any other camera I've used.

 

[Bingley]

It seems to me that the E-PL1 is the best value. You get in body stabilization, better EVF and built-in flash. This, of course, assuming that you don't want to have the DSLR lookalike in the form of the G1 etc.

I recently got an E-PL1, and a Pany 20/1.7. Although I'm still learning the ways of this kit, I've been very pleased so far. I got it as a fast lens/low light accompaniment to my Leica and CV film rfs, which I often shoot w/ slower lenses. A Leica and a couple of small (but slow) lenses, and the E-PL1 in my bag, and I'm set. The E-PL1/Pany 20/1.7 strikes me as the digital update of the Leica CL: roughly the same size, 40mm or equivalent, but can take other lenses. The results are promising:

 

[silverbullet]

Well, let's just say I crawfished on digital. Am giving my Canon S90 to my daughter and sticking with film. RAZOR had a very nice M2 for sale here last week and someone beat me to the punch. I ordered a BGN M2 from KEH with the intention of painting it black. Then I cancelled that order and began to think about a Micro 4/3 camera. I got a call from RAZOR about two hours ago and his M2 is now on the way to El Paso.

My decision process sometimes makes my wife crazy but I slowly arrive at a decision. I have owned a couple M2's in the past and looking forward to getting one in good condition as a backup for my M4.

Am taking my daughter to Istambul in late March. I am looking forward to traveling with two M's so I can shoot both black and white and color.

Thanks for all the input. The last couple posts were excellent and I learned a lot about the 4/3's systems. I hate living in a city of 800000 without a camera store. Of course, El Paso just became America's safest city which has some benefits. And for a thrill I can go across the river to Ciudad Juarez which is the world's most dangerous city.

Ouch......

Getting a bit tired about my (heavy) D300 and scanning b&w from my Bessa and ZI, I got an E -P2 with EVF and the 20mm Pana and 14-42 Oly lens.
Beeing sceptical about 'serious'🙄 and fast photography of streetscenes, I went to Sicily and Cracow for a few days leaving the analogue and heavy stuff at home. GREAT!

The weight of the small package, the battery life and the unobtrusiveness made my days in both cities.

next week I'm heading to Istanbul and think about a Voigtlaender 25mm f0.95 or a Oly 9-19mm or none of them and a better hotel....😀

My M-lens adapter is from Novoflex, my Planar or Summicron renders beautiful and together with the unmatched colours from the Oly shooting became familiar for me after some time of to be tired to make photgraphs.

The analogue cams I use only for very wide angle work or Tri_X shots.

Palermo/Cefalu:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/36573929@N00/sets/72157625031362422/

Cracow

http://www.flickr.com/photos/36573929@N00/sets/72157625122557105/

PS: The Pen brought back my taste for colour.....

Cheers
Bernd

 

[nightfly]

If you were buying an m4/3 today primarily for street shooting with say the new Panasonic 14mm and maybe the 20mm (I hate the 40mm focal length but I guess the other "normal" equivalent would be the CV 25mm and everyone raves about the 20), would you buy a used EP1, EP2 or a new EPL (say you had $500 or so for the body)?

Or forget them all and just get an NEX 3 and try to find some sort of 28-25mm equivalent adapted lens?

I tend to like the color I see coming out of the Olympus. Just not sure which would be the quickest to use like an M hyperfocused. Not too concerned about the viewfinder as I tend to just use it for quick framing.

 

[silverbullet]

When I want to get the last 3.5% + IQ I would go to the E-PL1 due to slight sensor/software updates.
The question 28 or 40mm is very much related to the shooting style of a person and/or the visual 'estimations' or, in other words ' the pics which might be in one's head..'
For me the 40mm is for portraits as in the past the 28mm. But I'm older now and not so 'demanding' in front of faces.
The 28mm provide in portraits the......mood which is created by the nearness of the photographer and the surrounding area of the subject.

The NEX is for me anogo because there is no EVF and the menues are so-so.

The DOF is wider compare to M/135 film but both Pana lenses allow focus by wire.

Cheers
Bernd

 

[malcD]

leica digilux 3 are 4/3 but are a big beast --- and still colectable

 

[kuzano]

Waited a long time for the right "Review Comments"

Waited a long time for the right "Review Comments"

I followed the panasonic and olympus Micro 4/3 offerings until I saw the comment I had been waiting for:

"The E-PL1 shoots sharper JPGs than the previous PEN and Panasonic offerings because of the installation of a weaker Anti Aliasing feature." This in direct comparison to the GF-1 and previous PEN bodies.

I had been looking for the camera that would not force me to shoot RAW to get better IQ "out of camera".

I have not been disappointed. There is a clear distinction in the sharpness of JPG images delivered by the E-PL1, ranked against other 4/3 sensor cameras. I even purchased a new Canon T2i kit and used it only for one month. I could not outshoot the E-PL1 with the Canon.

 

[febreeze-showered]

If you wanna' go really cheap, the G1 kits are dropping like crazy. I already have a GH1, but I recently bought a G1/14-45 kit from Amazon for $350 shipped. I sold the lens right back on Amazon and got $260 from it, so that's like having the G1 for $90; a stupid steal. Pair it with the 20/1.7 and you probably won't use your M-mount lenses that much.

I bought a few $20-30 adapters from China for a few of my Leicas and Voigtlaenders a while back. All I can say is that they work and I can't find any problems with 'em, so I really don't know what you would missing by skimping on the more expensive adapters.