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!

Olympus vs G1

Diane B

New member
I used the Voigtlander 35 with my G9 (4:3)--not the mini 28-35--and I found it much less of an issue than one would think. I learned quickly how to compose using the guidelines. I like it very much--but not sure how I feel about it with this camera. Time will tell--I'm in no hurry to do anything other than buy one or 2 more fast primes.

Diane
 

woodmancy

Subscriber Member
An EVF with contacts for the hot shoe would be ideal. Come on, Olympus. :)
Agreed - As I've said a few times, I never use my Ricoh GX's without the plug-in EVF - I love it. Not as good as the G-1, but good enough. I think Olympus will do it.
 

pellicle

New member
HiYa

... The real trouble is that I simply lose the will to live if I have to carry a tripod around with me, and worse if I have to put the camera on it.
yup .. despite knowing the needs well and struggling to keep my gear light I know the "look" I get here when I suggest I need to take the 4x5 and tripod with us on a trip .... heck I don't take it lightly to begin with (well ... how can you take 10Kg of gear lightly? ;-)

The reason I've got the G1 is to save weight from the 4x5 ...

...that it wasn't worth taking landscape pictures at less than 1/500th second without a tripod . . .:ROTFL:
yeah, some people are like that ... have you ever watched "monk" on TV? some people are just like that with gear :ROTFL:
 

Lili

New member
HI There
actually, of course I can see the benefit of tripods . . . sometimes, but I still reckon I can hand hold pretty well, I certainly don't find myself with blurry pictures.
The real trouble is that I simply lose the will to live if I have to carry a tripod around with me, and worse if I have to put the camera on it. It's like the old rule - take a ranging shot, then concentrate and get the good one, with me, it's always the ranging shot which is the good one.
Mind you, if I DID use a tripod, I wouldn't mess with these little cameras, I'd be straight for MF with a digital back, If I've got to carry a bag full of stuff, why not a BIG bag!
So, for me it's a personal thing, but I do remember someone saying to me that it wasn't worth taking landscape pictures at less than 1/500th second without a tripod . . .:ROTFL:
There's always beanbags (my favorite) and table top tripods. I use one with all my cameras when needed.
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
...The reason I've got the G1 is to save weight from the 4x5 ...
It's a matter of degree: How much are you willing to carry to double the resolution and image quality of your photographs? My usual carry tripod weighs 3lbs, sets up in 10 seconds, and slung onto or under my bag is hardly noticeable ... certainly nowhere near as much burden as carrying a 4x5 field camera, film holders, suitable tripod for that rig, etc.

Going back to the statement that started this train of thought:

- If I'm going to carry a 2+ lb lens with potential for 8x magnification and I want to get the best detail possible, I'll carry the tripod and use it. I bought this lens with that in mind.

- If I'm going to carry an ultrawide lens and am shooting scenery that benefits from having maximum resolution, I'll carry the tripod and use it.

- This new Olympus will not be any different with respect to those uses, with those lenses, than any other body I choose to carry other than being smaller and lighter, and having only the LCD to work with for critical focus rather than an EVF or OVF. Since I use the LCD on both my G1 and L1 for this purpose now, and find it more suitable to providing a view for critical focus than the OVF on either the L1 or the E-1, the lack of an OVF or EVF on this new camera is also no big matter. The smaller size and weight of the body is a plus, of course.

The question not answered as yet is just how suitable the other controls are for working on a tripod like this and whether the camera offers IR or wired remote operation. In that respect, it remains to be seen whether it is really useful for this kind of thing. :)
 

jonoslack

Active member
Going back to the statement that started this train of thought:

- If I'm going to carry a 2+ lb lens with potential for 8x magnification and I want to get the best detail possible, I'll carry the tripod and use it. I bought this lens with that in mind.

- If I'm going to carry an ultrawide lens and am shooting scenery that benefits from having maximum resolution, I'll carry the tripod and use it.
HI Godfrey
I guess I simply don't take it seriously enough.
It's at least 5 years since I've taken a tripod with me when going out to shoot.
 

Irenaeus

Member
:thumbs:

Hey, turns out in-body stabilization is quite natural.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_dPlkFPowCc
FWIW, it's VERY natural, according to one enthusiastic tennis commentator, who showed us a replay of Rafa Nadal winning a wonderful point at the French Open in one of his early matches.

What he wanted us to see was how stable Rafa's head remained during his complex movements. It was clearly so and truly amazing.

No offense intended, of course, and probably of no redeeming social value, but I did think it was at least mildly interesting....

Cheers,

Irenaeus
 

davemillier

Member
The nice thing about little cameras (like the Dp1 I've just acquired) is that they are so small and light that you can think of the tripod as your camera outfit and the camera as...well, a lens cap or a snickers bar or something, it's so unobtrusive.

With the DP1 a tripod is nice as well, as moving it fills in the time productively that you would otherwise have spent glaring at the little red light going flicker, flicker...



HI There
actually, of course I can see the benefit of tripods . . . sometimes, but I still reckon I can hand hold pretty well, I certainly don't find myself with blurry pictures.
The real trouble is that I simply lose the will to live if I have to carry a tripod around with me, and worse if I have to put the camera on it. It's like the old rule - take a ranging shot, then concentrate and get the good one, with me, it's always the ranging shot which is the good one.
Mind you, if I DID use a tripod, I wouldn't mess with these little cameras, I'd be straight for MF with a digital back, If I've got to carry a bag full of stuff, why not a BIG bag!
So, for me it's a personal thing, but I do remember someone saying to me that it wasn't worth taking landscape pictures at less than 1/500th second without a tripod . . .:ROTFL:
 

jonoslack

Active member
HI Dave
I hope you and the family are all well and flourishing.
The nice thing about little cameras (like the Dp1 I've just acquired)
You're becoming worse than me, I haven't bought a new camera for ages and ages . . . well, I had a G1 for a couple of weeks when it came out, but it went fast and that was it.
is that they are so small and light that you can think of the tripod as your camera outfit and the camera as...well, a lens cap or a snickers bar or something, it's so unobtrusive.

With the DP1 a tripod is nice as well, as moving it fills in the time productively that you would otherwise have spent glaring at the little red light going flicker, flicker...
:ROTFL:
 

davemillier

Member
Doing splendidly thank you. Elizabeth has just celebrated her third birthday (how time flies). We got her a camera...fetchingly styled in bright pink, rubber coated for robustness; only a fixed focus lens but a binocular optical viewfinder!

How's your lot doing? The apprentice sticking at it?

My camera collection has got a bit out of hand - but I'm buying cheap these days so it doesn't matter too much. I've a box full of stuff to put up for sale but for some reason I find it so much easier to bid for stuff on ebay than offer it...

Have you tried a Foveon camera yourself? Interesting technology. Much of the time it is difficult to see what the fuss is about but every now and again it does something special and you think "that's what they are going on about". The highlight recovery is very good actually. Makes a change from traditional cameras which tend to produce "dark" files or blown highlights. Sigma as a camera body manufacturer are a bit sad though. Way off the pace.

I take it this hiatus in camera merrygoround means you've found something you like for longer than 38 secs in the A900?

HI Dave
I hope you and the family are all well and flourishing.


You're becoming worse than me, I haven't bought a new camera for ages and ages . . . well, I had a G1 for a couple of weeks when it came out, but it went fast and that was it.

:ROTFL:
 
Z

Zodubs

Guest
Wildlife beware Im gettin the 70-300 on my doorstep tomorrow Just imagine what this chipmunk would look like extra-large... The 70-300 would increase his diagonal length by 80 compared to the 18-180

Itll take care to use the thing on the E-410 though, Im already getting a number of unsteady shots with the 18-180. Ill have to keep my shutter speed at 1/1000s at all costs. My next purchase may be the upcoming small Olympus camera with improved dynamic range, large viewfinder, weather sealing and naturally IS. Unfortunately, that means Ill have to keep my day job...
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
...I'll take care to use the thing on the E-410 though, Im already getting a number of unsteady shots with the 18-180. Ill have to keep my shutter speed at 1/1000s at all costs. ...
You should consider a good tripod. ;-)
 
Top