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!

convince me a gf-1/ep-2/ep-1 can replace my leica M

Brian S

New member
Film processing is still cheap here, $4 for a roll of 24 C41, developed to 4x6 and an index print. Color film runs$2.00 ~$1.50 a roll at the discount stores.
 

gallery7

New member
i am looking to the m4/3 cameras to get away from film. i shoot a LOT of film and it's becoming a pain. it is also very difficult to file when overseas.

i like the film. my bathroom is full of rolls drying 6-7 days a week. i don't need to shoot more, i need to shoot less.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
It will be EVIL full frame
Awesome!

All the reasons for the pricing of M8/M9 (range finder, precision mechanics and such) won't be there with an "EVIL" cam.

If it would have a G1 style swivel LCD screen (there will be no need for a sapphire screen as well. :D), I may bite.
 

djonesii

Workshop Member
... well gestalt is pretty low on my priority list. i need a decent manual focus interface, and reasonable size .... (quote thing didn't work the way I wanted)

The problem is that decent manual focus interface. I have tried three types of MF interfaces, and by a long shot, the least ergonomic is the micro 4/3. It's near on impossible to manual focus while doing anything else like walking, looking around for subjects, etc ..... The next worst choice is a SLR type interface, you just cant see how good your focus is on the current crop of entry level D-SLR, my Nikon F3 is pretty good, but it would be even better with a split screen with micro prisms. Still can't see outside the frame though. ( I really don't count the Speed Graphic because I've never got it adjusted right )

Now for that gosh darn gestalt .... The coupled range finder the Lieca invented to go with the M series camera is what makes range finder shooting what it is. There are endless discussions about this over at rangefinderforum.com, The SLR won for most cases, but there are those niches where the SLR die hards argue that that there system is just as good. From my experience, when you need the limited set of advantages that a C-RF gives, then it can't be beat.

On the other hand, if you can't put up with Leica, there is always the RD1, generally quite good, but still has some issues with the RF. If you can't do that, then you can go with cosina-voigtlander or Zeiss in the film domain. Both are rather bullet proof. I have owen a Bessa, and it was what got me hooked on RF style shooting.

To some extent, this is :deadhorse: either you buy into the C-RF, or not. When I decide to put up with the limits, the results are exceptional.



of course YMMV

Dave
 

gallery7

New member
thanx for the considered input Dave, i appreciate it. i have zero issues with my film M as i have had zero issues.

let me pose a question. how difficult is it to run hyperfocal on the ep-1?
 

djonesii

Workshop Member
As near as I can tell, there is no way to actually set hyperfocal distance in a traditional way, with the micro 4/3rds systems.

The traditional way is to use the markings on the lens to do this. You set the aperture, spin the lens focus rings so that the right markings line up and it's done, point and shoot to your hearts content. If you decide to change the aperture, just change the focus to the right markings.

With the EP-p1/G1, it goes more like this, on the G1, make sure you have a custom setting that splits the focus off the half press, and moves it to the AE lock button, and puts you in manual mode I use C1. Change into C1, set your aperture/shutter speed, then focus on something at the right distance. The next time something at that distance walks into view, you're good to go. If you have choose a good aperture and shutter, this can work just about like hyper-focal. Note the just about bit ..... I'm not going to bring crop factor and DOF agruments into this part of the discussion, because for all practical purposes, there is a method that can be made to work.

So, do I use it with the G1, no not really, I prefer to set my G1 into IA, use the 1/2 press to focus, and rotate the screen out so that I can see it when shooting from the hip. I have had the best results using the kit lens set to about 25mm or so, ie normal on this camera. I then got the 20mm for the G1, and thought this would be even better, but, I found that when using this method, I really depended on the image stabilization.

This is from the kit lens., and I like the ability to zoom.

This totally alters the method that I use for street shooting, and as such, while the results are similar to what I get with the RD-1, it is not a replacement. I find, I can capture the moment better with the RD-1. If you look up a fellow named Joel Myerwitz, he mentions the notion of sharpness in street shooting, he uses the term with respect to composition, and I find it easier to get "sharp" or well composed images with the RD1 and the C-RF as compared to the shoot from the hip G1. It may be a simple ergonomic issue with the view finder in the center of the camera rather than the edge. ( The edge being superior IMHO )

On the other hand, the EP-1 with the 20mm solves the IS issue by adding the stabilization to the body. However, the EP-1 does not have built in view finder. So, framing is either by eye, or shoot from the hip. Again, I can make the method work. I have not checked to see if there are any custom setting banks on the E-P1, but I know you can separate out the focus from the shutter release, and this is critical to make the approximate hyperfocal function as there are no markings or distance scale on the lens.

I have the luxury of having several camera systems. I can pick and choose what to use when. If my purpose is to go try to capture some interesting street images, I will almost always choose the RD-1. If I'm on a walk with the wife, lately, It's been the EP-1, but I'm tending back to the G1 a bit more. If It's the kids swim meet or soccer game, the D300. In the studio, I just got a Mamiya AFD, ( abandon hope and all that ). Horses for courses.

So, with out resorting to fanboyism ( is that a word? ) I stand by my first statement, NO, a micro 4/3rds can not replace an M, The lack of markings on the lens is part of that reason. Modify your question a bit, and then the answer can become a qualified yes. For example, can I use m4/rds to shoot street? Is it a great every day system?

Any how, hope that answers your question.

Dave
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
well, staying on top of film is a big chore on my end and i have been pondering retiring the m for something in the micro 4/3 line.

(actually my lovely wife bought me my m6 so i will be selling something else and putting the m6 into semi-retirement)

i don't need much convincing in the image department as i am sure the cameras mentioned are up to my rather low-fi standards. where i am uncertain is in the durability and the hard nocks department. without boring you with the details i often find myself in "dicey" shooting conditions. i mean i am not going to drag it behind the car or nothing but deserts and jungles are a distinct possibility.

so, how have your m4/3 cameras been holding up? any heavy daily users out there? anyone given one a real hard workout?

thanks for the input!
I don't like to try to convince people of anything when it comes to camera equipment. But I'll report my findings:

I've used the G1 almost daily for the past year and a half, in all kinds of conditions with all kinds of lenses. I take reasonable care to not destroy it, but I don't baby it. I don't keep track of how many photos I make with it specifically, but my 'in progress' LR catalog shows about 18,000 exposures made with it since Dec 2008; I know there are a number of others that are not in that catalog. It shows minor signs of use and wear, but not abuse. It continues to function as if new.

The experience using it is quite different from the experience of using a rangefinder camera. The photographs it can produce, on the other hand, can be quite comparable depending upon what you're after. A Leica M4-P with 35mm lens produces field of view pretty similar to the G1 fitted with 20mm lens.

Given the quality of what I can get in photos with the G1, and the type of work I like to do, yes: it has replaced my Leica M film cameras entirely.
 
J

JohnW

Guest
...I stand by my first statement, NO, a micro 4/3rds can not replace an M, The lack of markings on the lens is part of that reason. Modify your question a bit, and then the answer can become a qualified yes.
Thanks for this explanation, Dave.

So to address this issue, is there a legacy 35mm or 50mm equivalent that has distance markings and good image quality (no corner blurring or vignetting) on m4/3? From my readings there's no such M-mount option. But I wonder about SLR wides.

John
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
So to address this issue, is there a legacy 35mm or 50mm equivalent that has distance markings and good image quality (no corner blurring or vignetting) on m4/3? From my readings there's no such M-mount option. But I wonder about SLR wides.
The lack of barrel markings for focus and aperture with mFT and some FT lenses is occasionally annoying, but I've gotten used to it now and hardly notice. However, if you want to use an adapted manual lens, the Nikkor 20mm f/3.5 AI works beautifully, as do several other SLR lenses in the 20-28mm focal length range. The Olympus Pen F SLR lenses are particularly nice as they are as small as M-bayonet RF lenses. (The Olympus ZD 25mm f/2.8 also works very well, even autofocuses, but does not have barrel markings.)

I haven't had one to work with yet, but I understand the Pentax-Cosmicar 25mm f/1.4 TV lens (C-mount) also performs well on the FourThirds format. I'm looking forward to trying one of them some time soon.

I've used Nikkor 20/3.5, 24/2.8, 28/2 all AI series on the G1 with excellent results, as well as the Olympus ZD 25/2.8. I kept the Olympus, replaced the 20/3.5 with the Lumix G 20/1.7 as I found they did what I wanted better. I also have the Summilux-D 25mm f/1.4 ASPH, which has both barrel markings and aperture ring, and it's the best performer of them all but a bit on the bulky side. It also autofocuses on the G1.
 
Last edited:

Cindy Flood

Super Moderator
What you found on the web (on Stemar- it is a lens not a camera) is the pretty much all the information I can give.

Are there any inexpensive Leica lenses ?

I don't own one. I have fondled a few. No pics. Sorry.
Vivek, The lens that Dan used above in the lovely Grass with Bokeh photo is one that I have. There are lots of old Leica gems in the $300ish price range. I tend to use my Pen-F lenses in the shorter focal lengths, but the Leica 90 f/4 is great on the Oly and Panny m4/3 cams.

i am looking to the m4/3 cameras to get away from film. i shoot a LOT of film and it's becoming a pain. it is also very difficult to file when overseas.

i like the film. my bathroom is full of rolls drying 6-7 days a week. i don't need to shoot more, i need to shoot less.
John, Why don't you pick up a used G1 and see how you like micro 4/3? I don't abuse my gear;), but the G1 has been a work horse for me for almost 2 years now. I also have the E-PL1 which is pretty affordable. It has the advantage of IS for the alternative lenses that I prefer. I'm not sure that you are going to like the optical viewfinder on micro 4/3. It isn't a Leica situation, but Streetshooter has been very successful (as well as others) using the m4/3 cams in the more hyper-focal mode.
That said, would a m4/3 cam replace my Leica M's?....no.
 
Last edited:

seakayaker

Active member
Vivek, The lens that Dan used above in the lovely Grass with Bokeh photo is one that I have. There are lots of old Leica gems in the $300ish price range. I tend to use my Pen-F lenses in the shorter focal lengths, but the Leica 90 f/4 is great on the Oly and Panny m4/3 cams.
. . . . . another plug for an inexpensive Leica lens that cost less than the 90mm


Lite Violet Flower


GF1 with Ernst Leitz Wetzlar - Hector 135mm f/4.5 with Leica Thread Extension Tube -- ISO 100 -- f/4.5 -- 1/100 -- 135mm


From the serial numbers it appears that the 90mm is from 1954 and the 135 from 1960. Still producing some quality shots.

I also have an old Leica 50/2 and 35mm screw mounts that I will be picking up pretty soon. Both of them are small and fit the GF1 quite nicely, much more suitable for street shooting . . . . .

I have also used the Voigtlander 25mm, M-mount, and 50mm, screw mount, as well as the Zeiss 25mm ZM lens when walking around the city. They all work well with the small body of the GF1.

. . . . . it may never replace a Leica M . . . . . but it appears to work for a lot of people as a primary or secondary camera for a fraction of the cost! :thumbup:

Life is Grand!

Dan
~ ;)



 
V

Vivek

Guest
Cindy and Dan,

One of the first shots I have shown here are from a Hektor and an Elmar. I don't use them anymore.

There are better, faster and cheaper lenses in c-mount or from the Pen F line-up.

If anyone has these Elmars, Hektors, Thambars and Stemars, they can be, in principle, be used on m4/3rds.:)
 
Top