waiting for E-P2, thinking of GF1 and E-P1

[spiderfrank]

Hi guys, the micro4/3 system is very intriguing for me, but I still have a lot of concerns about GF1 and E-P1.

First of all, I have some CV LTM lenses (21/4, 35/2.5 50/1.5 90/3.5), and a Jupiter-11 (135/4), that I'd like to see at work on a digital camera.

I'm reading a lot of things about these two cameras, but the more I read, the more concerns I have.

Let's go...

1) anti-dust system: is the Olympus system better than the Panasonic one? I think it's very important in a camera without mirror

2) LCD: the Panasonic screen seems to be more defined, but the Olympus shold have more contrast: any problem in sunny days? What's better?

3) lenses: the Panasonic seems to be better and faster, also i didn't see a Panny at a shop window, till now, but the Olympus lenses on the E-P1 looks.. Well... Very cheap, compared to the gorgeuos steel of the camera body

4) AF: is the AF of the Olympus as fast as in the GF1, if you put a panny lens on the Oly?

5) Panasonic external EVF: is it good for focusing with legacy lenses?

6) the Jpeg of the Olympus are any better than the ones of the Panasonic?
(I know: shoot in raw and there is no difference, but I'm lazy... ;-) )

8) Is it so strange , to manual focus "far from the nose" ?


--
Gentlemen, I need your experience, please! ;-)

 

[kully]

Have you seen the reviews for both on dpreview.com? They're rather detailed and address at least some of your questions (6, 4, 3, 2, perhaps 1).

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympusep1/

&

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/PanasonicGF1/

 

[spiderfrank]

Yes, I've seen them, but I trust in you users much more than in Dpreview, I'd like to have a feed-back from the "real world"

 

[Freelander]

I too have read the tests.
I must admit that I've asked myself question #8 . I have yet to decide which to buy. So I too would like to read more on the subject

 

[dws21uk]

I'm tempted to get the G1, mainly as the EVF is supposed to be better. But I think I'll sit on the sidelines and see what the EP-2 is like and if there is G2 likely to appear in the next six months or so. I don't mind a crop sensor but would like good 1600 ISO performance.

 

[rover]

if you intend on using mf lenses you would be better served by the g1 or gh1.

 

[palec]

Last weekend I had a chance to check EP-1 and GF-1 (without electronic viewfinder). I liked EP-1 more, it was more intuitive to me, but the autofocus was not working as I liked (always focused on something else) and seemed to be slow. I tried also G-1 with set lens to see how the world looks with built-in EVF and it was very slow and digi-noisy (it was standard light indoors). I had no chance to try adapters to try M lenses. If the GF-1 viewfinder is the same, I'm not interested in this branch of cameras. I'm looking forward to see if Ricoh will offer something more interesting later this year.

 

[rover]

Last weekend I had a chance to check EP-1 and GF-1 (without electronic viewfinder). I liked EP-1 more, it was more intuitive to me, but the autofocus was not working as I liked (always focused on something else) and seemed to be slow. I tried also G-1 with set lens to see how the world looks with built-in EVF and it was very slow and digi-noisy (it was standard light indoors). I had no chance to try adapters to try M lenses. If the GF-1 viewfinder is the same, I'm not interested in this branch of cameras. I'm looking forward to see if Ricoh will offer something more interesting later this year.

The EP-1 is quirky. I have mine set to center focus spot only and use it like a RF. Focus seems fine to me like this, not close to Nikon DSLR fast, but faster than I am. Focus recompose and fire.

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

I'll say a couple of things about the GF1--autofocus is REALLY fast, as fast as the Pentax DSLR's (which, admittedly, are worst in class in AF speed--but still). And the LCD is plenty bright and contrasty, but you have to turn on this obscure setting deep in the menus--power LCD I think it's called?--to enable this. I don't understand why. It is a great screen.

I also want to warn you against using wide Leica-mount lenses on m4/3. I'm not happy with the results at all. longer lenses do very well, but you are better off with the native wides--corners are very soft with wide RF lenses. 50's and short tele's seem to be the great advantage of this system.

One nice thing about m4/3, to me anyway, is the relative cheapness of the bodies--you're not taking a huge risk getting one or the other, compared to, say, investing in an M8.2 and risking not liking it.

 

[JoeV]

I frequently manually focus with legacy Minolta MC/MD glass using the G1's EVF and have no problems at maximum aperture distinquishing focus without the magnified preview.

I'm biased, obviously, since I own a G1, but for my money it offers the most features for the money in u4/3 (ignoring video).

~Joe

 

[splitimageview]

5) Panasonic external EVF: is it good for focusing with legacy lenses?

I just tried the EVF on the GF1, and much prefer the built-in EVF on the G1. It's like watching HDTV vs. regular TV. 🙂 I'd have a difficult time focusing manually with it. Quite the opposite with the G1 EVF -- it's the most precise manual focus system I've ever used.

 

[android]

From what many have said about the GF1's EVF, it would be nice to think that a higher quality GF1 compatible EVF will be produced in the near future (perhaps the recent Epson?).

 

[splitimageview]

To clarify, the EVF on the GF1 is quite satisfactory for use as an eye level viewfinder with the standard micro 4/3 lenses and autofocus.

 

[android]

To clarify, the EVF on the GF1 is quite satisfactory for use as an eye level viewfinder with the standard micro 4/3 lenses and autofocus.

For sure but wouldn't it be cool it were good enough to focus M-mount (or any of the other myriad mount) lens too?

 

[padraigm]

I have the e-p1 and like it a lot for what it is. I only have a film M and so when I want to use those lenses for digital I can using the e-p1. It is awkward, and as many have said not a long term solution.For M8's going ~$2000 this is probably the best route. I do think the IS on the e-p1 is invaluable and was the man reason I went with it over Panasonic, especially when you have to manually focus lenses. My 35mm Lux with image stabilization 🙂 That new payy with f1.7 IS on the e-p1 is very tempting.BUT... having to hold the camera up to focus is a pain and that is where it quickly becomes apparent this is a bit stretch. I am very interested in seeing what Olympus does with the e-p2. I have not used the EVF on the Panny's but if its better than the one for the GF1 you know it might not be a bad small easily portable alternative. Crop factor sucks though.

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

I just tried the EVF on the GF1, and much prefer the built-in EVF on the G1. It's like watching HDTV vs. regular TV. 🙂 I'd have a difficult time focusing manually with it. Quite the opposite with the G1 EVF -- it's the most precise manual focus system I've ever used.

This really makes me think that a better investment for the GF1 user might be a used G1 body.

 

[mackigator]

@mabelsound: I'm starting to think that used G1 is the best bang for buck of this set of cameras. As far as size (one of the main G1 objections), I've decided that pocketable is not the factor I once thought it was and that a camera doesn't need to be any smaller than my hand.

 

[count_zero]

if you intend on using mf lenses you would be better served by the g1 or gh1.

Why is that? The EP-1 has in body IS, zoom focus, and auto face detect with manual lenses. Unless, you mean m43 lenses, then yes you do get slightly faster AF speed, but that will most likely change in future firmware updates. As far as using an EVF, hoodman hooloupe works just fine. I fixed mine with a piece of plastic to slide into the hot shoe mount, others have used a strip of aluminum.

 

[250swb]

The EVF on both the G1 and GF1 while being different in pixel count are both excellent for focusing M or any other legacy lens. The view is clear and the focus point is easy to spot, and should it be needed the zoom function is much better implemented on the Panasonic cameras. Like any new viewfinder if it is used for a few minutes you get used to it and before long it is second nature.

The only downside I could see to the Panasonic system is that it doesn't have in body IS, so no stabilsed M lenses. Other than that, and speaking as an owner of both a G1 and EP-1, the Panasonic cameras are much easier to use overall, with well thought out switches and access to important functions, and the kit lenses are very good indeed and fast focusing.

Steve

 

[laptoprob]

I have the GF1, chose Panny because of the lenses. No IS, but I am not used to IS. I know, crop factor and all.
My biggest issue with the GF1 is not the EVF. It is small, but it works. High ISO noise is the main drawback. Hope that will be improved in future firmware updates.
I am planning to compare my screwmount lenses to the Panasonic zooms, expecially the wideangles. First impressions are very favourable to the Panny WAzoom.

So maybe in the near future some Heliars and a Kobalux 21 up fore sale.

I am not planning on using multiple systems. Portability is a big issue to me. Therefore the GF1 is a winner!

I am even planning to use my Minolta MD 300/4,5 IF on the GF1. That lens is already converted to Alpha mount... Big lens with an expensive lenscap!