k-hawinkler
Well-known member
Hi Tim,I didn't see the thread - I've had mine for a few days now. Not convinced yet....
Congratulations!
Not convinced yet...about?
Thanks for a reply.
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!
Hi Tim,I didn't see the thread - I've had mine for a few days now. Not convinced yet....
Not convinced about what?I didn't see the thread - I've had mine for a few days now. Not convinced yet....
I find that chatter rather funnyOh, I understand all that. But other lenses don't make so much noise and annoyance in the process of doing it, I don't understand why the Summilux is so singular in this regard. It's the noisiest little cha-cha I've ever seen on a camera with the E-PL1.
I just want my cameras and lenses to be quiet tools. They'll inevitably make some noise ... trying to work with something that sounds like a castanet at random moments is a severe annoyance.
G
Hi Godfrey,Oh, I understand all that. But other lenses don't make so much noise and annoyance in the process of doing it, I don't understand why the Summilux is so singular in this regard. It's the noisiest little cha-cha I've ever seen on a camera with the E-PL1.
I just want my cameras and lenses to be quiet tools. They'll inevitably make some noise ... trying to work with something that sounds like a castanet at random moments is a severe annoyance.
G
Leica does the lens design, Panasonic does the firmware, mount design, and manufacturing on these lenses. I think Leica has another hand in at the QA level too.Hi Godfrey,
it could be a Leica thing: my 2.8/45 macro is also 'talking' to me.
It's doing this on both E-M5 and E-M1.
Kind regards.
Hi Tim,
Congratulations!
Not convinced yet...about?
Thanks for a reply.
Interesting comments.Karl-Heinz, Godfrey,
I don't want to shoot too freely too soon but after a couple of long walks with the camera and a variety of lenses (Panny 20mm f1.7 pancake, some adapted Leica M, Panny 7-4 and 14-150 and 100-300) I am... not convinced.
The files are 'aspartame' - quite like the real thing but when you pay attention, clearly synthetic. I need to make prints really but at 50% on a 100dpi screen or even at 100% on a retina screen, it all looks digital to me. Carefully suppressed, well disguised, primped, tweaked, preened and optimised but... still looks and feels... digital. So whilst I largely buy in to the ergonomics and form factor and size and weight and am looking forward to the 12-40mm F2.8 I have to say that if I keep it, it will have to do service as my 'dog walking in the rain' camera for a while before I believe in it enough to take on a trip.
I say 'largely' about the ergonomics because again, like the files, they talk the talk but are less confident in the walk: for example, everyone is cooing about the way you can control everything quickly and easily and configurably, to me it is utterly a non-starter that you can't specify your own minimum shutter speeds for auto ISO, nor access an algorithm that does so for you in the light of focal length. That, to me, stinks of what British Northerners call 'all fur coat and no knickers' - roughly translated as it looks and sounds a lot more classy than it is.
Early days but I am not yet sure this will be a keeper...
A bit of both, though I haven't run the RAWs through anything but LR. The JPEGS are very good at first and second glance but they don't feel very natural to me when they sink in. The RAWs need very differing treatments as ISO progresses higher and I'm not sure I have gotten on top of that properly yet...Interesting comments.
Are you looking at in-camera JPEG images or processing raw files yourself?
G
A bit of both, though I haven't run the RAWs through anything but LR. The JPEGS are very good at first and second glance but they don't feel very natural to me when they sink in. The RAWs need very differing treatments as ISO progresses higher and I'm not sure I have gotten on top of that properly yet...
I have shot RAW only and quite a bit of RAW+peg and tried to match or improve the file from RAW over jpeg. It's quite tough!
Yet again, interesting. Thanks!A bit of both, though I haven't run the RAWs through anything but LR. The JPEGS are very good at first and second glance but they don't feel very natural to me when they sink in. The RAWs need very differing treatments as ISO progresses higher and I'm not sure I have gotten on top of that properly yet...
I have shot RAW only and quite a bit of RAW+peg and tried to match or improve the file from RAW over jpeg. It's quite tough!
Hi, can you give us an idea of which camera you're comparing the E-M1 with, to find it unnatural?A bit of both, though I haven't run the RAWs through anything but LR. The JPEGS are very good at first and second glance but they don't feel very natural to me when they sink in. The RAWs need very differing treatments as ISO progresses higher and I'm not sure I have gotten on top of that properly yet...
I have shot RAW only and quite a bit of RAW+peg and tried to match or improve the file from RAW over jpeg. It's quite tough!
Hi Tim,
Many thanks. The low ISO OOC JPGs at first glance look indeed pretty good.
Very high ISO OOC JPGs seem to have lots of visible artefacts.
I shoot raw + jpg.
Which picture settings have you been using?
I typically use natural with contrast -2, saturation 0, sharpness +2, noise filter standard, WB auto.
Olympus Viewer 3 seems to produce nice colors IMHO.
Olympus Viewer vs. Lightroom vs. Aperture: Micro Four Thirds Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review
I have been post-processing with CS6 and Nik to try to match the noise reduction and sharpness of the OOC JPGs, especially for very high ISO.
As the E-M5 was, the E-M1 is intended as my walkaround setup with long reach.
They are complementary to my D800E, M9, NEX-5N, and NEX-7.
I am also looking forward to the FF NEXs.
Sure... my benchmarks are very varied. I shoot, among other things, an IQ180, a D800e, a 5D, an RX-1 and RX-100, Nex7, M240 and Panny GH2. I have had other MFT cameras before, too.Hi, can you give us an idea of which camera you're comparing the E-M1 with, to find it unnatural?
Do you have any example shots to show what you're seeing?
Thanks
Brian
Fitted with a short lens, it would fit in my waist pack without any problems. I tossed it with the Summilux 25 and lens hood (which is a little bulky)k fitted into my small Lowepro Terraclime 100 bag last night ... it takes up about a quarter to a third of the room in that bag. It's not particularly heavy.Is there some way to easily transport it? Does it fit in a coat pocket or waist pack?