GF1 Shoots Willie Nelson

[Jim Radcliffe]

I had a chance to shoot Willie Nelson the other night. He was performing in Fort Worth, Texas. The stage lighting at the venue was low and bad for photography (orange, red).. so I decided to shoot the entire thing in BW. I've not shot a concert in BW only in over 20 years so I thought it might be fun and a learning experience. I used the internal Dynamic BW setting of the GF1, ISO 800 with the 45-20mm.

The GF1 probably performed better than I did. I was a fair distance from the stage and had to hand hold the camera for all shots, no monopod for this one. I think I can do better as I get to know the camera better. Normally I use my 5D and 70-200 L glass for such events.. I left it at home and only took the GF1 and 45-200. Not as good as the Canon 5D but quite respectable.

You can see the complete series of shots on my website: http://www.boxedlight.com under the GF1 section.

Here's a few samples:

 

[Terry]

Hi Jim....whoops didn't realize you posted these here. I just commented over at DPReview. I was pretty surprised that the 45-200 would even allow for ISO 800. Great series. I hope you are pleased!

 

[s.agar]

Jim,
Very nice photos despite the unfavorable conditions.
Seyhun

 

[Diane B]

Glad you shared these. I really have to carry the 45-200 more. Its been the one left out of the bag most of the time.

Despite the conditions, you did a terrific job with these. Did you also shoot in RAW (RAW + jpeg)? ISO800 in mono worked really well at this size also.

Glad you are liking your GF1. Has your EVF arrived--and are you using it?

Diane

 

[Jim Radcliffe]

Glad you shared these. I really have to carry the 45-200 more. Its been the one left out of the bag most of the time.

Despite the conditions, you did a terrific job with these. Did you also shoot in RAW (RAW + jpeg)? ISO800 in mono worked really well at this size also.

Glad you are liking your GF1. Has your EVF arrived--and are you using it?

Diane

The EVF is supposed to arrive tomorrow.. so no, I did not use it.

These were all shot as JPG. I have not used RAW yet. I always work with JPG when I first get a camera and then, if the difference is really worth it, I will begin shooting RAW.

With my M8 I shot RAW only.. but with my other cameras, besides the DP1, I continue to shoot JPG.

 

[Jim Radcliffe]

Hi Jim....whoops didn't realize you posted these here. I just commented over at DPReview. I was pretty surprised that the 45-200 would even allow for ISO 800. Great series. I hope you are pleased!

Pleased I am. The 45-200 is softer than I prefer on the long end but it still lets me do work my M8 would totally miss. If I won the lottery last night I will be buyig an M9 and a full set of lenses... otherwise, I'll use the GF1 for its versatility.

 

[magicmoe]

Hi Jim

Nice shots.

I can see that you only shoot jpeg. Could you please elaborate on your settings. Are they standard in camera or have you been tweaking a bit. I myself find the shots from my gf1 with 14-45 to be blurry/unsharp. And yes I know about the rule of shutter speed vs lenght of lens ie. shooting 1/40 minimum on pana 20 1.7. I have tried tweaking my jpg but to with no luck.

thanks

 

[Diane B]

Pleased I am. The 45-200 is softer than I prefer on the long end but it still lets me do work my M8 would totally miss. If I won the lottery last night I will be buyig an M9 and a full set of lenses... otherwise, I'll use the GF1 for its versatility.

We're all waiting for that LOL. Not sure what I would do camera wise with the lottery, but that might be one of my choices--OR--stick with the m4/3rds or whatever comes down the pike in the future. I don't want to keep switching systems (I, like you, still have my Canon system) so hope m4/3rds stays strong in the foreward movement.

I just need to get my 45-200 back in the bag. It will always go traveling with me, but I find I just keep 2 lenses otherwise--maybe I need to make room for 3.


Diane

 

[jonoslack]

HI Jim
Happy New Year
These look great to me, I'm not sure that you'd have managed as well with an M9 (even if you did win the lottery).

I love my M camera, but I'm increasingly wondering whether m4/3 isn't hitting the sweet spot.

all the best

 

[Jim Radcliffe]

Hi Jim

Nice shots.

I can see that you only shoot jpeg. Could you please elaborate on your settings. Are they standard in camera or have you been tweaking a bit.

I use the camera as it came from the factory... everything standard. All of my tweaking is done in post in Photoshop CS3. I've tried Lightroom and found it lacking. To me, there is no substitute for Photoshop.

The 45-200mm is soft on the long end. My 14-45 seems to be pretty sharp and of course the 20mm is just amazing.

 

[Jim Radcliffe]

HI Jim
Happy New Year
These look great to me, I'm not sure that you'd have managed as well with an M9 (even if you did win the lottery).

I love my M camera, but I'm increasingly wondering whether m4/3 isn't hitting the sweet spot.

all the best

Happy New Year, Jono.
I could not have done better with an M on this because of the manual focus issue alone. Faster glass might have helped but in the long run I would have wasted way too much time focusing an M.

I think MFT has the potential to be something very special. I am so surprised that Leica did not take the opportunity to develop their own MFT offering. I believe they missed a golden opportunity.

The X1, no matter how big that sensor is, is just too little, too late, too expensive.

I see Canon and Nikon watching all of this with interest and would even venture to suggest they have models in the works. I think the G11 has just about reached the end of its life/development... they need to move to MFT.

 

[Lili]

Excellent work, Jim, B&W really suitable here. It defines his stage presence in a way, IMHO, color would not. They are sharper that I'd have expected at the for 400mm-e; you've a steady hand and the IS paying its dues!

 

[hodad66]

great shots!!

 

[Howard]

Jim,

These are great shots. It is interesting that you shot at ISO 800 with dynamic B&W with great results. Another photographer got similar results when he shot some candids of his children at the same settings as you used and noise was not noticable. Good work. Your galleries on your website is very impressive.

Howard

 

[Jim Radcliffe]

Jim,

These are great shots. It is interesting that you shot at ISO 800 with dynamic B&W with great results. Another photographer got similar results when he shot some candids of his children at the same settings as you used and noise was not noticable. Good work. Your galleries on your website is very impressive.

Howard

Howard,

I prefer to shoot ISO 400 for most low light work but sometimes it just doesn't pan out. In many ways I like the end result of the in-camera processing on the Dynamic BW setting... it gives the photos a bit of grunge effect and also just seems right for this particular subject.

I went to the concert with every intention of shooting color but quickly abandonded that idea due to the light. At the same time I realized it would be good light for BW shooting so, in a sense, Willie made the decision for me.

I have just begun experimenting with other settings on the GF1.. still need to try some RAW files but I will have to use the Panasonic Software for that.

 

[jonoslack]

Hi Jim

Happy New Year, Jono.
I could not have done better with an M on this because of the manual focus issue alone. Faster glass might have helped but in the long run I would have wasted way too much time focusing an M.

Weeeel - I think that's probably practice, the trouble would have been the focal length - you might have managed with a 135, but I'm sure the 90 would have been to wide.

I think MFT has the potential to be something very special. I am so surprised that Leica did not take the opportunity to develop their own MFT offering. I believe they missed a golden opportunity.

Yes - me too - sad and probably silly. I wonder whether they might have felt that it was a problem marketing 'me too' cameras just like the panasonics at a much higher price?

The X1, no matter how big that sensor is, is just too little, too late, too expensive.

Again - quite agree, although I think they're responding to a perceived demand, and I suspect it may do very well. Needs a couple of firmware tweaks (IMHO), but I'm not sure that expensive isn't a bonus for them rather than a downfall.

Mind you, if they were to produce an X2 with a zoom lens, and some firmware enhancements, I'd have thought that might sell very well.

I see Canon and Nikon watching all of this with interest and would even venture to suggest they have models in the works. I think the G11 has just about reached the end of its life/development... they need to move to MFT.

I think the Samsung camera rather eloquently points to their problem, which is that in practical resolution and quality terms the difference between 4/3 and APSc is becoming less and less relevant . . . but in lens terms an APSc lens is always going to be noticeably larger than it's MFT counterpart.

MFT is ahead of the game, and it might just be the right answer.
(but you won't get me to give up my M9!)

all the best

 

[Jim Radcliffe]

Excellent work, Jim, B&W really suitable here. It defines his stage presence in a way, IMHO, color would not. They are sharper that I'd have expected at the for 400mm-e; you've a steady hand and the IS paying its dues!

I agree. I think the BW, which was not my first choice, actually turned out to be the best route and just feels right for the subject.

 

[Jim Radcliffe]

Jono..

Hi Jim

Weeeel - I think that's probably practice, the trouble would have been the focal length - you might have managed with a 135, but I'm sure the 90 would have been to wide.

Mind you, if they were to produce an X2 with a zoom lens, and some firmware enhancements, I'd have thought that might sell very well.

MFT is ahead of the game, and it might just be the right answer.
(but you won't get me to give up my M9!)

all the best

Jono, don't forget that I started with a RF back in the 1960s and had been using the M8 for a year... I'm not a slow learner... the M8/RF just did not fit my needs most of the time. I really don't want to be bother with focus unless it is something really critical.

The X2 with a zoom and interchangeable lenses would be a good thing.. surely still overpriced because of the red dot but a good thing.

MFT could be what 35mm film was for Leica.. the difference is that the big boys will step in and Leica's only real game will still be their M system and glass.

 

[Amin]

Jim, as I mentioned elsewhere, I thought your series of Willie Nelson is fantastic and hope I can approach that level of vigor when I'm almost 80!

I love my M camera, but I'm increasingly wondering whether m4/3 isn't hitting the sweet spot.

I sure think so, but it will be nice if they can get the price down just a bit more. A MFT body plus Lumix 7-14 and 20/1.7 makes for a terrific kit, and I'm looking to the 45/2.8 to round it out.

I think the Samsung camera rather eloquently points to their problem, which is that in practical resolution and quality terms the difference between 4/3 and APSc is becoming less and less relevant . . . but in lens terms an APSc lens is always going to be noticeably larger than it's MFT counterpart.

Well, the Samsung 30/2 is actually smaller than the Pana 20/1.7, but on the whole, MFT is one compromise and APS-C is another. I'm not convinced that either format is inherently a better compromise than the other, but MFT certainly has a nice head start.

I enjoyed reading an interview at Quesabesde.com with Michiharu Uematsu, "planner of Panasonic imaging department". The article is in Spanish, and I read the Google translation, but it was still worth a read to get Uematsu's thoughts about the issues we are discussing. Some excerpts along with the translation:

According Uematsu, who reminds us at all times that it is only his personal opinion, the mirror cameras tend to disappear or at least to be reserved for more professional end models.

¿Sustituirán los sistemas como el Micro Cuatro Tercios a las SLR?
"Replace the systems like Micro Four Thirds SLRs?


"Dependerá de lo que hagan otras compañías", sentencia, aunque se muestra encantado con la posibilidad de que más firmas se decidan a ir por este camino.

"It depends on the performance of other companies," sentence, but was delighted with the possibility that more firms decide to go this way.


"Significaría que la industria ha aceptado nuestra propuesta", comenta mientras juega con otra baza importante: "En las cámaras SLR ya está casi todo inventado por otros, pero en este nuevo sistema somos nosotros los que tenemos la experiencia y las tecnologías necesarias."

"It would mean that the industry has accepted our proposal," he says while playing with another major asset: "In the SLR camera is almost everything has been invented by others, but in this new system is we who have the experience and technologies..."


While on the possible entry of other companies in the Micro Four Thirds standard has decided not, Uematsu forward to our next question on the occurrence of similar systems, such as Samsung NX also dispense with the mirror, but betting on a larger sensor size.

"Puede tener sentido para un profesional, pero para la mayoría de usuarios y para el tamaño de copias habitual no se notará la diferencia. Nuestro tamaño de sensor supone el equilibrio perfecto entre calidad, dimensiones de la cámara y rendimiento óptico", sentencia.

"It may make sense for a professional, but for most users and the size of normal copies not notice the difference. Our sensor size is the perfect balance between quality, size of the camera and optical performance," sentence.

 

[Terry]

A couple more uber fast lenses and I would agree that m4/3 could be a fine sensor size. For instance as a portrait lens the 45 macro isn't quite fast enough for people but something like a 50/60 f1.4 would solve it. One fast wide prime (does not need to be pancake) would round things out. Then they could work on something like a 24-70 that is faster and I think it would be a formidable system.