Fun with the Lumix 20mm f/1.7 (Image Thread)

[woodyspedden]

Woody,

Both cameras are using the same sensor. Panny uses a weaker AA filter that gives marginally more detail. But essentially shooting RAW there really isn't a demonstrable difference. As you said, shooting jpegs, the Oly wins.

Here is what I copied from the GF1 review (from a number of different pages):

As shown elsewhere in this review the color rendition and white balance on a bright sunny day suffers in comparison to the Olympus E-P1 (which has some of the best JPEGs on the market), and at a pixel level the JPEGs don't make the most of the sensor's capabilities, but for most users (without access to an E-P1 for comparison) I suspect the results - even at the default settings - will give little cause for complaint.

Focus and metering are very reliable (far more so than the E-P1), and since both lenses are excellent, overall impressions are very positive indeed - we took over 3500 shots during the production of this review, and the number of problems we had that could be laid fairly and squarely at the feet of the camera (as opposed to the operator) was tiny.

Switching to raw capture and processing in ACR lifts the GF1's output from the realms of the 'perfectly decent' to the top tier of consumer camera picture quality, particularly at lower ISO settings, and particularly when detail and texture are important. Taking the camera's JPEG engine out of the equation reveals the excellent pixel-level sharpness captured by the CMOS sensor, and allows you to get exactly the color rendition you want (if, like us, you don't find the GF1's default color mapping that appealing). Even a straight ACR or Lightroom conversion at default settings produces results that are on a significantly higher level than those produced in-camera from the same exposure.

Panasonic GF1 advantages over E-P1

Faster autofocus and AF subject tracking
Higher resolution screen (twice as many dots)
Built in flash
Optional Viewfinder
AVCHD Lite
Fast (F1.7) pancake lens kit

Olympus E-P1 advantages over GF1

Currently supports autofocus on a wider range of Olympus Four Thirds lenses
In-body IS
Collapsible kit zoom
Stereo Sound
Dual control dials
Art Filters

As we've seen with previous Panasonic models, switching to raw mode is like lifting a veil from the output, and even in this quick ACR conversion the true capabilities of the sensor are revealed, with visibly more resolution and none of the demosaicing artefacts or moiré we saw in the camera JPEG. By comparison the Olympus has improved far less, which - as we pointed out when we reviewed the E-P1 - is as much an indication of just how good its JPEGs are as anything else.

Given our experience with every other Olympus and Panasonic camera it comes as no surprise that this raw comparison reveals the GF1 to have a slight resolution advantage over the E-P1 (thanks, presumably, to a slightly lighter low pass filter) - in fact the amount of detail you can capture with this body / lens combination is simply stunning.

If you are a raw shooter there's no doubt that the GF1 can make more use of a good lens (removing the E-P1's superior processing equalizes just about everything else, and from a color and tonality point of view there's no significant difference).

Here is the link to the full review:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/PanasonicGF1/

Terry and jono

I wasn't trying to "explain" why the jpeg from raw process with the GF1 "lifts a veil" compared to the EP-1. I was simply pointing out that this was a conclusion drawn in the review. If it is true then it is important (at least to me). If it is rubbish then I will stop reading DPReviews.

Sorry if I created confusion but I read what I read and Terry quoted the pieces of the article I was referring to. I have no personal experience with the GF1 and only had a brief period with the G1 so I will keep my nose out of this.

Woody

 

[Bob]

Jack, I like the second one very well, but it reminds me that I ought to get home real soon to put in the snow stakes.

Karl, great geometrics and composition
-bob

 

[jonoslack]

Terry and jono

I wasn't trying to "explain" why the jpeg from raw process with the GF1 "lifts a veil" compared to the EP-1. I was simply pointing out that this was a conclusion drawn in the review. If it is true then it is important (at least to me). If it is rubbish then I will stop reading DPReviews.

Sorry if I created confusion but I read what I read and Terry quoted the pieces of the article I was referring to. I have no personal experience with the GF1 and only had a brief period with the G1 so I will keep my nose out of this.

Woody

HI Woody

What you said was:

On the other hand, if processing a Jpeg from raw then the GF1 is a far superior engine. They could not have been clearer about this.

You may have read what you read, but you did not say what you read!

Actually, this is not what they said at all, what they said was that the reason why:

why the jpeg from raw process with the GF1 "lifts a veil" compared to the EP-1

is because the jpg engine on the GF1 is inferior, not because it's RAW engine is so superior.

Terry's long and carefully chosen quotes make this quite clear.

all the best

 

[Jack]

Jack, I like the second one very well, but it reminds me that I ought to get home real soon to put in the snow stakes.

Well, the city workers were busy placing placing them in both Boston and Cambridge when we were there Gimme a minute and I'll find one on a hydrant for you...

:ROTFL:

 

[jonoslack]

Just a couple from today (all taken with the EP1 and finished in LR3)

Breakfast time with the 20 f1.7

Time to cut the Vine :ROTFL:
(with the 20 f1.7)

 

[Jack]

LOVE the abandoned greenhouse Jono!

 

[Bob]

Well, the city workers were busy placing placing them in both Boston and Cambridge when we were there Gimme a minute and I'll find one on a hydrant for you...

:ROTFL:

Jack,
I already have one on my hydrant, but I need to put them around my driveway. Losing 250 feet of asphalt after a snow can be pretty ugly especially when there might be stone walls hidden there.
-bob

 

[Bob]

LOVE the abandoned greenhouse Jono!

Jack,
Are you sure that has been abandoned? Looks like a pretty good crop is growing there.
-bob

 

[jonoslack]

Jack,
Are you sure that has been abandoned? Looks like a pretty good crop is growing there.
-bob

I'm saying nothing . . . . . I wouldn't dare!

 

[Joan]

Thanks Dale!

Two jellies from today with the GH1:

Amin, I love this blue one, very serene. Where did you take these?

 

[Amin]

Thanks Joan! Those were from a family trip to the New England Aquarium in Boston. Not quite as nice as the National Aquarium in Baltimore, where we previously lived, but still a very nice place to spend a day with a couple animal lovers.

The 20/1.7 is a nice lens to take to an aquarium! Here's one more from the visit:

Jack,
I already have one on my hydrant, but I need to put them around my driveway. Losing 250 feet of asphalt after a snow can be pretty ugly especially when there might be stone walls hidden there.
-bob

Having recently moved to the Boston area, I don't like the sound of this!

 

[Terry]

Amin,
I feel like Finding Nemo.

 

[Amin]

Amin,
I feel like Finding Nemo.

This one sort of had personality like that. It was as if I raised the camera, and he turned at the last moment to flash me his better side .

 

[Diane B]

Amin,
I feel like Finding Nemo.

Ah, then to add another aquarium shot :ROTFL:. I agree, Amin, the 20 is a lot of fun in an aquarium. I tried videoing the jellyfish with the 20--haven't put it together yet, but did pretty good.

f/1.8 1/30s ISO800 The speckles are small matter (likely food) sinking down through the water.

 

[ecsh]

Don't worry Amin, you will soon see the wonder of living in the city with snow<G>
Joe

 

[Henk S]

This is a really fun lens! The combination of the G1 articulating LCD and this lens is great for a Sunday ride.

 

[Joan]

Amin, that is one cute fish pose. Not so sure about yours though, Diane, they look kinda surly, LOL.

Neat shots you two, I love aquariums.

Henk, I agree. The 20 makes the G1 feel like a different camera, doesn't it? Not quite as svelte as the Gf1, but still really easy and fun to use just about anywhere. Where did your bike take you?

 

[Diane B]

Amin, that is one cute fish pose. Not so sure about yours though, Diane, they look kinda surly, LOL.

Neat shots you two, I love aquariums.

Don't you love the lips on Amin's fish :thumbup:. It looks like a cartoon character. He didn't appear in ours, but then the two NC aquariums are aimed at indigenous fish in the 3 areas of the state---mountains, piedmont and coastal. We're not going to see many 'cute' fish LOL. I can't remember the circumstance of the koi in my first one--certainly not an indigenous fish.

 

[Brian Mosley]

Thanks for the clarification. Most do talk about the color not the B&W and I do very much like the B&W I get out of the G series. That being said, I haven't done any deep comparisons between the B&W rendering between the two brands.

Hi Terry, so do you shoot jpeg when you're doing B&W work then? I find raw gives me much more flexibility in applying colour filters after the fact. For instance, I may apply an orange filter for skin tones, and another filter for the surroundings... as with this shot for instance :

E-P1 + ZD 50mm f2
1/125s f/4.0 at 50.0mm iso200

Cheers

Brian

 

[Jack]

Brian:

Interesting you use orange filtration for caucasian skin -- IME it exacerbates skin blemishes and underlying blood vessels. I much prefer using a light green to cyan filter for cleaner looking skin. Of course with kids, it is less problematic...