The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Fun with 4/3rds cameras/ Image Thread

jklotz

New member
I agree - I was impressed. I have no problem using iso 800. Wouln't even think twice about it. I was also impressed that, using the IS, I was able to hand hold at 1/13th, at almost a 168mm (ff equivalent) focal length and get that sharpness. Try that with an M8 and see what happens!
 

Brian Mosley

New member
Hey, I was quite happy with an LX1... I don't focus on 100% pixel level noise -I focus on the big picture.

The G1, developed from RAW using Qimage Studio really suits me fine... I would happily shoot upto 800ISO without a 2nd thought, as I said - the image above is approx 1600ISO straight from the sensor at 100% pixel peeping level.

Kind Regards

Brian
 

Arne Hvaring

Well-known member
Two recent G1 shots. I'm finding that low ISO RAW files from this camera can take a lot of manipulation before showing any strain.
 
Last edited:

woodyspedden

New member
To me the G1 is more than just fun. When you think that you can take a $700 body (think of the kit lens as a freebie) and with appropriate adapters use arguably the best RF lenses on the planet (and some of the best DSLR lenses as well) with a sensor that really delivers the Micro 4/3 is a system to be reckoned with for a long time to come.

I have two M8 bodies which I love and will probably never sell. But if I was starting over the situation would be one M8 and one G1. No point in having a second $6200 body just to protect yourself from the too often failures of the M8. And with this rig, no UV/IR filters etc. I don't mean to imply that the G1 is all the M8 is. No way. The M8 is still a special camera and harkins back to simpler times, built the Leica way, and you get wonderful files.

Mine will be delivered soon. I hope to be making images soon and will post if there is anything is either technically interesting or artistically compelling to share.

Three cheers for the G1 and the micro four thirds standard. The utility of the M lenses will continue for another 100 years

Woody
 

peterb

Member
To me the G1 is more than just fun. When you think that you can take a $700 body (think of the kit lens as a freebie) and with appropriate adapters use arguably the best RF lenses on the planet (and some of the best DSLR lenses as well) with a sensor that really delivers the Micro 4/3 is a system to be reckoned with for a long time to come.

I have two M8 bodies which I love and will probably never sell. But if I was starting over the situation would be one M8 and one G1. No point in having a second $6200 body just to protect yourself from the too often failures of the M8. And with this rig, no UV/IR filters etc. I don't mean to imply that the G1 is all the M8 is. No way. The M8 is still a special camera and harkins back to simpler times, built the Leica way, and you get wonderful files.

Mine will be delivered soon. I hope to be making images soon and will post if there is anything is either technically interesting or artistically compelling to share.

Three cheers for the G1 and the micro four thirds standard. The utility of the M lenses will continue for another 100 years

Woody
Woody,

My sentiments exactly.

I had no idea what was to be expected with the G1.

But the more I read the more intrigued I became and the more I realized why Pop Photo named it camera of the year when both Nikon and Canon rolled out hitters like the D700 and 5DMkII. No slouches in the image making arena.

Not by a long shot.

But viewing systems aside, and I see the benefits of both the extraordinary EVF of the G1 (which coming from the grainy D2 is like seeing light for the first time) as well as the amazingly clear, bright (if occasionally errant) rangefinder of the M8 preferred by traditionalists for all the right reasons of intimate capture whilst in the midst of any action, the images produced by this innocent $800 wonder, particularly when using low ISOs of 400 or less, shooting in RAW, with the added enhancement of being able to also use some of the finest optics ever developed, is, to me, nothing short of amazing.

What a camera! In my opinion it can hold its own against every other camera full frame and under.

I can't recall looking forward to using a camera as much as I do with this one.

Peter
 

Diane B

New member
I'm quite happy with my G1 also--I don't have other lenses--yet, but still enjoying it. This is handheld--45-200 lens the first day I had it-- in very low light and a dark fuzzy dog f/4.5 1/20s ISO800 84mm (effectively 35mm 168mm)/

 

jonoslack

Active member
I'm quite happy with my G1 also--I don't have other lenses--yet, but still enjoying it. This is handheld--45-200 lens the first day I had it-- in very low light and a dark fuzzy dog f/4.5 1/20s ISO800 84mm (effectively 35mm 168mm)/

HI Diane
Lovely picture (looks like a lovely dog too).
I'm glad you're having fun. How do you feel about the IQ in comparison with your Canons?
 

Diane B

New member
HI Diane
Lovely picture (looks like a lovely dog too).
I'm glad you're having fun. How do you feel about the IQ in comparison with your Canons?
I was honestly skeptical at first. I've done a few comparisons with the 5D and some good primes, though not Ls (and the 14-45). I did them on tripod, grey lifeless sky and no sun, shot in RAW and processed in LR 2.2 (which I know quite well, so got good results from the files). I found if I increased the contrast, clarity, gave the G1 files a bit more capture sharpening, the photos were really quite close (I used same settings--understanding that the difference in the FF vs. 4/3rds sensor would result in some differences). I was very happy with the results. I didn't print any of those, but did print several files from others (Uwe Steinmuller's test for one) before I got the camera--up to 11 x 17---didn't try any larger. I don't think the DR is quite comparable but that can be gotten around also. The color is quite good also--lots to like.

All in all---I feel a lot more confident using the G1 than I did before. I also found that a well exposed ISO800 was quite good---I wouldn't take a poorly exposed ISO800 and try to push and pull it, but I try not to take those LOL.

I feel sure I will eventually buy some alternative glass but I'm going to be patient (the economy insists a bit on that LOL) and see what Panny and Oly offer in the next 6 mos for the m4/3rds and of course there's legacy glass--- and in the meantime acquaint myself with what I need to fill in for my needs (I need at least one if not more fast lens--if good, the 20 f/1.7 will do fine). I'm following very closely about adaptors, lenses--and possible good alternatives that aren't over the moon, price wise. I'm also trying to keep in mind one of my reasons for originally buying it--keeping it small.

To sum my feelings up ;););)---I suspect I will use this camera WAY more than I initially suspected--buying it, in truth, just to use in place of the G9 ( and the used 400D I bought this summer to use instead of the G9 which I don't enjoy shooting with) for hiking, long hours of urban walking or extra camera for travel. I'm just having great fun shooting with it :thumbs:--love the MF assist, finding the IS is very good, like the EVF much much more than I would have thought. All in all--there have been 2 cameras I've really hoped for--an affordable FF and a quite small interchangeable lens camera with good IQ--and got both. Technology amazes sometimes LOL.

BTW--Molly is my 2 yr. old Standard Poodle--I have an almost 13 yr. old black also (Kate). We refer to them as the 'farm poodles' --great retrieving background dogs (and tough as blazes to shoot--fuzzy, black and dark brown and fast LOL). She, esp., is usually in motion--though they are both great house dogs.

Hope you are staying warm over there. Its the coldest in years and years here in the SE (NC foothills)--I watched the temp tumble this morning--down to 10 deg. I know that's nothing in terms of the midwest and northeast US, but we have 'thin blood' LOL--and no clothes to really be able to stay outside for long periods of time without many MANY layers LOL--and then you can't move, let alone shoot a camera:D:D:D.

Diane
 

Brian Mosley

New member
I'm just having great fun shooting with it :thumbs:--love the MF assist, finding the IS is very good, like the EVF much much more than I would have thought.
Hi Diane, I'm quite surprised that you're using MF assist with your 14-45... why is that? the CDAF seems to be very accurate and flexible. I really like the focus tracking mode - where you can lock focus on a point and recompose while the camera maintains focus on the same point.

CDAF is a triumph on this camera - and with future camera processors getting faster, I wouldn't be surprised if CDAF becomes even more intelligent and accurate for real world shooting.

Kind Regards

Brian
 
Yes, he's a Weimaraner. He's a handful, but a great dog. He poses for the camera! I now understand why William Wegman shot them!
And a black Doberman Pinscher living together?
I used to have a white Doberman, his face looked very much like your Weimaraner, therefore I was not sure.
 

Diane B

New member
Hi Diane, I'm quite surprised that you're using MF assist with your 14-45... why is that? the CDAF seems to be very accurate and flexible. I really like the focus tracking mode - where you can lock focus on a point and recompose while the camera maintains focus on the same point.
Maybe just because I can LOL. I agree the AF is very good. But--its also very nice to be able to move your focus just a bit. For instance (this happens to be with the 45-200), in this one, (just shooting for fun)

it was relatively dark, contrast was low and to get auotfocus I had to use the right lower hand side of the glasses frame--I wanted the left side--just to the left of the nosepiece-- so just used MF assist and moved the focus where I chose (harder to see in this downsized version, but its apparent when you look at a larger version on a bigger monitor). I do the same with the 14-45--not always certainly but when I find I need or want to. I'll try your method also, but sometimes for closer shooting, it seems so easy to use MF assist.

Addendum:--I tried the AFC also--both work well, but because I've been using MF assist, its very fast for me with the 2 Panny lenses. I did also notice a difference in the histo which I'll explore a bit more to understand what's happening--I'm sure its because I haven't locked AE in AFC--I'll have to play with both more to see which I prefer. BUT--isn't it terrific that we have the 2 choices?!?! Actually 3---I can go to Direct AF also and move the AF point wherever I want. I'm very used to using the center point for AF, so I have to adjust a bit here LOL.

Diane
 
Last edited:

Diane B

New member
Hi guys, sorry but i'm really bored.

G1 14-45 kit lens.

Balancing act.

Cruzer.
Mark.
Fine with me--I like to see what others are doing with it---I just have to find some interesting subjects. Over the years I've shot a great deal around the farm--so I'm bored with that LOL. Really like the first one.

Just a bit more on why I'm using MF assist--I tried the AFC--just with a couple of objects on a table that I could play with. What I found, for me, is that using the MF assist is similar to using an anglefinder C with my tilt shift lens on the 5D (but MUCH nicer in actual use :grin::grin:) whereas using AFC is like moving my AF point around (though it certainly can be placed easier)--but the Achilles heel for me with AFC was that with lower contrast, I couldn't get the focus to be as precise as MF assist--or sometimes actually 'stick'. In many circumstances, I can see it would be the option to use, but for times I want more precise focus, MF assist would be my choice.

BTW--I do find the AF of the G1 to be really doggone good.:clap::clap:

Diane
 

Arne Hvaring

Well-known member
To me the G1 is more than just fun. When you think that you can take a $700 body (think of the kit lens as a freebie) and with appropriate adapters use arguably the best RF lenses on the planet (and some of the best DSLR lenses as well) with a sensor that really delivers the Micro 4/3 is a system to be reckoned with for a long time to come.

I have two M8 bodies which I love and will probably never sell. But if I was starting over the situation would be one M8 and one G1. No point in having a second $6200 body just to protect yourself from the too often failures of the M8. And with this rig, no UV/IR filters etc. I don't mean to imply that the G1 is all the M8 is. No way. The M8 is still a special camera and harkins back to simpler times, built the Leica way, and you get wonderful files.

Mine will be delivered soon. I hope to be making images soon and will post if there is anything is either technically interesting or artistically compelling to share.

Three cheers for the G1 and the micro four thirds standard. The utility of the M lenses will continue for another 100 years

Woody
Hi Woody,
more or less my feeling re the G1 too. As I have said before, this is a landmark product and I think we're now only in the stoneage of advanced EVF cameras that will eventually revolutionize the concept of DSLRs. I wonder when Canon & Nikon will enter the game, no doubt they have by now noticed the stir the G1 has caused in the photographic community.
 

mark1000

New member
Fine with me--I like to see what others are doing with it---I just have to find some interesting subjects. Over the years I've shot a great deal around the farm--so I'm bored with that LOL. Really like the first one.

Just a bit more on why I'm using MF assist--I tried the AFC--just with a couple of objects on a table that I could play with. What I found, for me, is that using the MF assist is similar to using an anglefinder C with my tilt shift lens on the 5D (but MUCH nicer in actual use :grin::grin:) whereas using AFC is like moving my AF point around (though it certainly can be placed easier)--but the Achilles heel for me with AFC was that with lower contrast, I couldn't get the focus to be as precise as MF assist--or sometimes actually 'stick'. In many circumstances, I can see it would be the option to use, but for times I want more precise focus, MF assist would be my choice.

BTW--I do find the AF of the G1 to be really doggone good.:clap::clap:

Diane
I'm finding the MF assist mode very user friendly myself, i never bothered with MF before with my previous camera's ( all Bridge) that i had, but this G1's MF is a different animal all together.


Mark.
 
Top