Thinking about a GF-1 or a NX100 to supplement my M6 for candids…

[Ken Ford]

FWIW. I bought the GF1 with kit zoom and EVF thinking if I had to resort to using a digital camera sometimes then this was as close to useful as I was likely to get.
The body is OK but the over-complicated bells and whistles menus annoy me and I shoot jpegs on auto-everything. The results are good, I have to say. But at normal viewing on a 20 inch Mac monitor or printing to A4 size my daughter's LX3 is every bit as good.
The zoom lens on the GF1 is so big it rather defeats the idea of a compact camera, even though the body is compact.
The EVF is just adequate but better than the arm's reach view of the LCD.

If I were contemplating the same decision today I would get the new LX5, keep the EVF I have and sell the GF1 body and zoom. In fact I keep prevaricating about making that trade. The only thing stopping me is that I'd lose 50% of the value (now that's a loose term!) of the GF1 and only get for it what it would cost the buy the LX5. I could put a CV 21 or 25 on the GF1 but I lose the facility of the zoom which I'd retain in the LX5 in a very compact package.

Your comments reinforce a few of the decisions I had already made:

1. I have absolutely no interest in the kit zoom or any other zoom. I'd be buying with primes only.

2. I despise the EVFs I've seen from all makers, so I'd be using brightlines.

Your bells and whistles comment is one of my major fears. I'd much prefer a simple interface like the X-1 or M8/9 without techno geegaws, but...

Except, the samples here are not really adequate for judging high ISO. There is some shadow within which you can see the noise, but not much color. I really can't say one way or another with this subject matter, at this size and viewed on my monitor. I can say that most digital cameras are handling noise better than a few years ago.

Good point. historicist (or anyone else with a NX), could I trouble you for a few sample pics with heavy shadow?

The Sony NEX cameras do take an OVF (check the Sony website), but what about the M8? It has a larger sensor than most, a viewfinder and can take lenses you already own. Shoot RAW and remove noise in post processing. Lightroom 3 is now very good for this and will only improve. I happily shoot ISO 640 and I imagine the Leica lenses you own will be faster than the system lenses for most of 4/3rds cameras so the performance gap will be closed.
I spent a while considering all the cameras you listed for a backup to my M8 but, for the reasons you stated, nothing came close. I love shooting digital but in the end I bought a Fuji medium format camera as my backup; it was the only thing I could find that was affordable and offered both the image quality and handling characteristics I wanted.
YMMV.

Bob.

I wasn't aware of the Sony brightline, I stand corrected. (It kills me that they don't even show the FOV in the website specs, further proof that Sony is a consumer electronics company first and a serious camera company a distant second.) I still have an issue with Sony's overly proprietary approach to things.

I'd definitely consider an M8, but budget is an issue. I may have mislead when I stated I wanted a digital rig to supplement my M; what I really mean is replace under certain circumstances. The M isn't going away, I'm just looking for an alternative. But I seriously doubt I'd be carrying the M gear at the same time as this new purchase.

 

[Ken Ford]

(much snipped...)



Try before you buy, if at all possible. Subtle interface diffs can matter a lot, and you never know how until you try.

Some randomish thoughts....

1. There may be some interesting/useful cameras/lenses announced over the next week at Photokina. Even if nothing new interests you, used prices will likely decline over the next 1-2 months as the bleeding-edgers trade/sell their old gear for new.

2. I don't think LX3/LX5/P7000 files will please you at ISO800 & above; m4/3 will be 1-2 stops better, APS-C another 1-2 stops above m4/3. If you don't mind post-processing every high-ISO image, maybe, LR3 and other noice-reduction software works well. But the bigger sensors will always outperform at high ISO.

3. P&S OVF aren't nearly as nice as a Leica-type shoe-mount OVF.

4. Samsung NX will not accept your Leica M-mount lenses, but Sony NEX and all m4/3 will. Even if you don't think you're interested at the moment, understand that Samsung removes that option.

5. General opinion seems to be that Samsung NX10 makes some unfortunate jpg processing choices and does best shot raw plus post. Hopefully the NX100 does better, or maybe NX10 output is fine for you. Again, try b4 buy.

6. GF1 with 20/1.7 and a 35-40mm OVF can make a great street shooting rig w/AF. Prefocus/hyperfocal use isn't quick/easy but can be done, you'll find lots of forum posts about this.

7. NEX has exc high-ISO performance, good jpg output, but 16/2.8 isn't as sharp or fast as Pany 20/1.7. No hot shoe, so you can only use whatever OVF Sony offers, currently only for the 16. Again, this could change at Photokina.

8. NEX/NX 1.5 crop is better than M4/3 2x crop if you favor wide angle. But neither NEX/NX have an equivalent of the 20/1.7.

9. Some either like or have no issues with NEX interface, but there are also those who actively dislike it. I hate it passionately, wouldn't keep one if you gave it to me. I understand we're all different, and have no quarrels with those who like it. But I know more people who dislike current NEX interface than dislike Pany, Oly or NX. Maybe a NEX 7 with more buttons at Photokina?

10. In bright light, for what you're doing, I don't think Oly vs. Pany AF speed diffs will matter much, but Oly has no lowlight focus aid, and hunts much more in low light.

That's all I can think of for now.

Good info that closely parallels a lot of my thinking.

I've been fence sitting on a similar decision for about a year now.

Nothing has yet to really scream "buy me" so I've continued on shooting my ZI loaded with Tri-X and everything is, on the whole, pretty good. I actually think the urge has subdued substantially.

Having said that, a photographer (artist, not a hobbyist) that I know, loves his Panny G1 with the 20mm. And he's used in his lifetime everything from Ms to 8x10s. This is now his Leica so to speak. I didn't care for the EVF on it when I thought about buying one but perhaps you just get into it and grow used to it?

Over at Steve Huff photo there was an article comparing the Olympus E-PL1 with the NX10. Might be some good info there for you.

I'll look for the Steve Huff article - I've never been there. Thanks for the lead!

January-February may show the Sony NEX-7. Supposedly, Sony has developed the camera but is waiting to see how the NEX series is receive. Also, Zeiss is suppose to be close to announcing five E-Mount lenses from the ZM series. If true, and if the NEX-7 meet expectation of greater manual control, the NEX series might become a camera of great interest for those that lurk here. Lots of ifs...

I'll try to keep an open mind...

I was right there with you on the whole film thing... I haven't lost my passion, I just wanted to shoot more and be free of the consumable constraint. My thinking was, initially, that I was going to get the Samsung NX 10 with the 30mm pancake. I wouldn't consider 4/3. I think it's silly to go with a smaller sensor kit that costs more than APS-C. I got tired of waiting for Samsung to release the NX in the US, and bought a refurbished Nikon D5000 body with the 35/1.8 prime. Total cost, $670 w/ lens. I'm glad I did, as (and don't quote me) it looked like the NX10 with prime I wanted is a lot more in the US than it was when it was 1st released in Europe. (I think I saw B&H wanted around $1000 for this combo - again, don't quote me...) My other camera is a used Fuji F20, which I have a growing admiration for. Good low light, decent IQ, nice macro function, great flash, pocketable, cheap. I wouldn't go with a high-end small sensor compact - ever. They all have the same IQ, broadly speaking... a constraint of the tiny sensors they all use, no matter how many bells, whistles, unnecessary features, or how cool the body looks or what lens manufacturer they pay to use their name on the lens...

To my way of thinking:

1. Get an APS-C camera, forget the 4/3'rds.
2. I'd get the Samsung. The NX 1000 looks very interesting.
3. Don't discount the smaller DSLRs. It's what I ended up with... worth looking at.
- No IQ compromises. Built-in flash, viewfinder. Nikon D5000 has articulated screen, an effective quiet mode, great 1600 ISO/useable 3200, an articulated screen, and an available good, fast, reasonably priced prime lens. It also was the cheapest if you don't mind refurbed.

I did consider a D40x or something similar, but I'd really prefer the DV experience for this - I've found I tend to shoot differently with an SLR than a DV. I will admit a strong bias to APS over 4/3 or M4/3, but again I'm trying to keep an open mind - it may well be that the GF-1 outperforms the NX100 in low light, and the Panasonic 20mm is a known gem.

 

[Ken Ford]

FYI - the m4/3 sensor in the e-p2 and e-pl1 are pretty much on par with the samsung nx10 sensor as far as noise performance goes, and actually have higher resolution. Not much difference between them though.

Keep in mind that the panasonic 14mm (28mm) f2.5 is due out in the next few weeks and will pair really well with the superb 20mm (40mm) f1.7 that's already out. If small primes are your thing anyway.

Yeah, but what's the pixel pitch of a 4/3 sensor vs. APS? Low light and shadow performance is important to me. And small primes are most definitely my thing!

For me one huge factor in the decision would be ability to use M lenses.
Who wants to carry a whole second set of lenses for an auxiliary camera?
I'm kind of amazed a few people are recommending a separate system as a second camera when really good camera systems are available that accept M lenses.
I have an M6, an RD1s and a Panasonic GH1. Whichever cameras I want to use, I only ever need my M lenses.
Carrying your M6 and a NEX or m4/3rds with a couple of M lenses would be a no brainer in my opinion.

Luckily I'm looking at this as a complete parallel system to my M. Having something less expensive would be an advantage, too - there are areas I'm leery of taking my M alone.

I have a NEX-5 with the Sony OVF, I don't use the OVF much, but it's nice to know it's there if I find myself in very bright sunlight. I used to own the GF-1 and it's OK, but the EVF is rubbish, the 20mm 1.7 is great though, much better than the Sony pancake.

The tipping point for me was the m43 crop factor, it makes most M lenses turn into telephotos, and super wides almost impossible.

Also, if using manual focus lenses, the screen on the Sony is much clearer, and focus seems to 'snap' like it didn't on the GF-1, and zoom-in function on the Sony is much easier to access, and less of an after-thought like it is on the GF-1.

I liked the GF-1, but for me it was a few niggly flaws that annoyed me. Shame, if the EVF was better, I'd probably still own it.

MT

OK, OK - I'll go check the Sony out at the local SonyStyle store. What I've read about their 16mm isn't overly impressive, though.

 

[Ken Ford]

Here's a question for the crowd: *in your opinion*, can current M4/3 cameras produce results equivalent to TX or BW400CN?

 

[Pickett Wilson]

Putting esthetics aside in the film vs digital wars, my E-P2 will blow Tri-X away in any shooting situation. Will they look the same? With software (Exposure 3) I think so. But, regardless, from a noise (grain) standpoint, they E-P2 is much better.

 

[Ken Ford]

But what about from a shadow detail and dynamic range basis? I grew up with TX pushed to 1600, I ain't scared of no grain.

 

[historicist]

Except, the samples here are not really adequate for judging high ISO. There is some shadow within which you can see the noise, but not much color.......

FWIW here's some NX-10 examples with colour:

ISO800

ISO1600

ISO3200

 

[Ken Ford]

Thanks for the samples, but...

This project is officially suspended pending how the Fuji X100 turns out. Wow!

 

[Bobfrance]

Wow indeed!