Site Sponsors
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 148

Thread: Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    302
    Post Thanks / Like

    Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

    Just read the Sean Reid article where he noted some decreased resolution in the frame corners when a Leica M lens was used as compared to the results from the kit lens.

    He ascribes the differences to the way that the peripheral sensor photo elements handle the off axis light rays for the kit vs M mount (film based) lenses.

    Anyone else note these differences??

    This would seem to reduce the applicability of the large number of M mount lenses.

    Martin

  2. #2
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,848
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

    There is some mention in this thread:
    http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5450

    Is this across the board with all M lenses or just wide angle?

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    96
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

    I don't think that resolution is a good reason for using adapted lenses on the G1.
    The kit lens is really good. No adapted lens is going to give sharper results on that sensor.

    Adapted lenses are great because they give you options.
    I know that, with my 4/3 bodies, the Olympus 4/3 50 macro gives me one look, and a Zeiss 50 gives me a different look (and 50mm on a 4/3 zoom is something else again). I could spend hours in front of the computer trying to make one lens look like the other, or I just carry both and get the look I want right away.

    To put it a different way, the fact that M lenses do not give the same results as the kit lens increases the applicability of M lenses. Why else would you bother mounting an M lens on a G1, if not to get a different look?

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    302
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

    Monza

    I don't know if the focal length of the lens will change the resolution of the frame edge using M lenses. Sean only showed results from a 28 mm f 2.0 Leica Summicron.

    Perhaps Sean can answer this directly??

    Martin

  5. #5
    Senior Member m3photo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    1,043
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    28

    Re: Why else ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Bernard View Post
    Why else would you bother mounting an M lens on a G1, if not to get a different look?
    ... wider apertures = faster lens + better/different bokeh possibilities.

    Just took along my C/V 50mm f/1.5 Nokton and shot where the kit lens at 45mm and f/5.6 wasn't what I was after.

  6. #6
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,848
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

    I am not a subscriber, so the only lens tested on the G1 was the 28?

    It's interesting that people have been using M lenses on the G1 since December and this is the first time anyone has noticed this...

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    413
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

    Quote Originally Posted by Martin S View Post
    Monza

    Perhaps Sean can answer this directly??

    Martin
    Hi Martin,

    Sean Reid said over at LUF yesterday that he doesn't read GetDPI, unfortunately.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    413
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

    I mentioned the cornerproblems in a thread 10 days ago, but no one picked it up. Carl mentioned it too somewhere. People are beginning to wonder what's going on here.

    Now to me, as I have practically zero knowledge about optics and sensor electronics, it's a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma.

    All I can say is this:

    - the corner problems are not just in 28 Cron shots, below you can see corner crops (f1,4 and f5,6) from a quick test I did with my pre asph 50 Lux. The IQ does seem to improve as the lens is stopped down. It's the same with the 28 Cron.

    - I bought the 25 D Lux especially for my G1 and I'm very pleased with this lens. I like to keep it on my G1 all the time, but, the same kind of shot with tree branches in the corners of the frame show a lot of CA at f1,4 when opened uncorrected in Silkypix. When lens correction is applied in this raw converter things start to look a lot better. The same shot at f4.0 looks just fine.

    - The first adapter I got from a well known German manufacturer was too short, and focussed way past infinity. The replacement they sent me two days ago will not focus past 10 meters, so back into the box it goes. I'm sure they will eventually get it right.

    So, not being a technical guy, I'd say that from all this, it seems that the G1 sensor relies on post correction heavilly. Indeed the kit lens is very good, but than again, it's widest opening is f3,5...
    The adapters, not just the one I mentioned, are another uncertainty. To what extend these adapter problems deteriorate the IQ I really don't know, and I'd very much like to find out.

    All in all I'm a happy customer and I took 3300 shots with the G1 in one month. I like the ergonomics, and the value I got for my money. I'm hoping Leica or Olympus will come up with another µFT body that's a good addition to my G1. I would buy it in a heartbeat and get a complete camerasystem for fast documentary work.

    Now I hope the text above and the samples below will help to further explore and get to the bottom if this.

    Cheers, Peter

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    1,309
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

    Quote Originally Posted by peterv View Post
    (...)
    - the corner problems are not just in 28 Cron shots, below you can see corner crops (f1,4 and f5,6) from a quick test I did with my pre asph 50 Lux. The IQ does seem to improve as the lens is stopped down. It's the same with the 28 Cron.
    Hmm. I remember those images. To me and at least another poster that looks just like veiling flare. Have you now tried the same lens on an M8 and found it better at the borders?

    Quote Originally Posted by peterv View Post
    (...)
    - I bought the 25 D Lux especially for my G1 and I'm very pleased with this lens. I like to keep it on my G1 all the time, but, the same kind of shot with tree branches in the corners of the frame show a lot of CA at f1,4 when opened uncorrected in Silkypix. When lens correction is applied in this raw converter things start to look a lot better. The same shot at f4.0 looks just fine.
    I have owned the Panasonic 25/1.4 and used it with my E-510. Corners and borders were not sharp. Stopping down helped but they never became critically sharp (far from it actually).

    Quote Originally Posted by peterv View Post
    (...)
    - The first adapter I got from a well known German manufacturer was too short, and focussed way past infinity. The replacement they sent me two days ago will not focus past 10 meters, so back into the box it goes. I'm sure they will eventually get it right.

    So, not being a technical guy, I'd say that from all this, it seems that the G1 sensor relies on post correction heavilly. Indeed the kit lens is very good, but than again, it's widest opening is f3,5...
    The adapters, not just the one I mentioned, are another uncertainty. To what extend these adapter problems deteriorate the IQ I really don't know, and I'd very much like to find out.
    You are saying Novoflex screwed it up again? Oh oh.

    Why should the adapter have any impact on image quality at all? I'm not that technical either but I would imagine a correctly made adapter with parallel "sides" has no impact at all on IQ. Thinking about it all a mechanical adapter does is to move the lens a bit away from the sensor placing the chunk of glass where the focusing mechanism can be used for focusing from MFD to infinity.

    The rest is air and, possibly, reflections. Reflections wouldn't increase CA or make borders blurry though.

    What I can think of is that the sensor needs the light to hit the pixel dwells in a bit more straight way (is that perpendicular?) than we (me, everybody?) have assumed. I don't kow how that works with a lens stopped down giving us just very good "sharpness" also at borders/corners.

    I see no real reason to worry. I don't look for perfect borders shooting wide open. I want the borders and corners to be decently sharp when I have stopped down (read landscapes, architecture, documentary images).

    Maybe some of us just expect too much from 30+ old Leica stuff? I remember Erwin Putz commenting on Voigtländer lenses (which he found to be bad compared to Leica lenses of course) saying they all were clearly better than 10 years old leica constructions. Whatever that tells us.

    just my cents, /Jonas

  10. #10
    Senior Member m3photo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    1,043
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    28

    Cosina-Voigtländer Nokton 50mm f/1.5

    Best example I can muster today: at f/1.5 - Handheld at 1/30th shot through glass and the in-focus edges seem OK to me.

  11. #11
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ithaca, NY
    Posts
    3,538
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Cosina-Voigtländer Nokton 50mm f/1.5

    Quote Originally Posted by m3photo View Post
    Best example I can muster today: at f/1.5 - Handheld at 1/30th shot through glass and the in-focus edges seem OK to me.
    Hard to judge from a 3-D target like the coiled snake, but the lower right and left corners look a little weird.

  12. #12
    Ranger 9
    Guest

    Re: Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

    Quote Originally Posted by peterv View Post
    Sean Reid said over at LUF yesterday that he doesn't read GetDPI, unfortunately.
    If he decides he wants to start, I think we should charge him $24.95 per year for a subscription. >:-0

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    413
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

    Quote Originally Posted by Ranger 9 View Post
    If he decides he wants to start, I think we should charge him $24.95 per year for a subscription. >:-0

  14. #14
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,848
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

    Heh.

    I remember those photos, but there was something said about them being taken through a car window...

    I do not have an M adapter at the moment but I did test two lenses, a 20/3.5 Olympus Pen F lens and a 24/2.8 Nikkor AF, neither of which exhibited any corner distortions...both of these lenses are SLR lenses of course, not RF lenses, if that makes a difference...

  15. #15
    Ranger 9
    Guest

    Re: Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

    Quote Originally Posted by Martin S View Post
    Just read the Sean Reid article where he noted some decreased resolution in the frame corners when a Leica M lens was used as compared to the results from the kit lens.

    He ascribes the differences to the way that the peripheral sensor photo elements handle the off axis light rays for the kit vs M mount (film based) lenses.

    Anyone else note these differences??
    I think this article on the Four Thirds website gives a good insight into what Reid is said to have noted. The diagram in the "Enhancing the Linearity of Light" section seems significant.

    The article argues that the Four Thirds standard gives a uniform spec for optimizing the design of the camera lenses, the design of the sensor and its microlenses, and the in-camera and post-processing software so they all work together as well as possible.

    In view of that, it's not exactly surprising that a third-party, non-optimized lens might produce, um, non-optimized results.

    It's too bad that the full Four Thirds spec is revealed only to member companies that have signed the nondisclosure agreement; otherwise we could have hours of fun trying to develop rules of thumb for deciding which third-party lenses will be the most Four Thirds-friendly and which won't.

    Lacking that, though, we'll have to do it the old-fashioned way and rely on experience... which this would be a great place to share, of course!

  16. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    413
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonas View Post
    To me and at least another poster that looks just like veiling flare
    Hi Jonas, it may look like veiling glare , but the question is what is causing it? Would you say you're 100% sure it's not the adapter?
    I know this 50 Lux I used certainly does not show veiling glare like that on my M's.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonas View Post
    Maybe some of us just expect too much from 30+ old Leica stuff? /Jonas
    Sean Reid did his tests with a relatively new Summicron 28 mm. So have I, and I think Carl too.

  17. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    413
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

    Quote Originally Posted by monza View Post
    Heh.

    I remember those photos, but there was something said about them being taken through a car window...

    That's right. Two days later, after getting no further response, I decided to delete the sample photo's. Oh, well.

  18. #18
    Senior Member Y.B.Hudson III's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    314
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

    soo...Peterv, did you ever do an articulate, re-pete-able lens test to illustrate your supposition?

  19. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    413
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

    Hi Y.B. I'm just asking questions. Don't do scientific tests, certainly not through car windows

  20. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    302
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

    This initial post has certainly generated a lot of interest, and great responses.

    I think that one of the causes of the apparent edge resolution "problems" is a simple law of optics. The light rays entering at the sensor periphery are too oblique to strike the sensor photosites with the same accuracy as the center photosites. This is basically the same argument that Olympus made for the original 4/3 concept.

    The apparent better results from the "kit" lenses maybe related to either some design modification in the lens, or some post processing tricks that boost, and sharpen the peripheral sensor responses.

    This may have cause some limitations on the M lens utilization on the G1, especially wide angle lenses at wide diaphragm openings. Unfortunately, this is exactly the type of lM, or CV lens that we would use.

    Any thoughts.

    Martin

  21. #21
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,848
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

    From the link that Ranger 9 posted (very interesting reading*, thanks) this appears to be the issue. The 4/3 lenses are designed for the sensor.

    What interests me at this point is investigation into which adapted lenses exhibit this, and is it strictly related to focal length or to other factors specific to individual lenses. I suppose it is possible (probable?) that some lenses are naturally telecentric and therefore should work fine on the G1.

    *They need a proofreader: "To maximize the performance of the image sensor, the camera must be designed so that the light is straight even on the periphery of even on the periphery of the image sensor surface."

  22. #22
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,848
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

    The first adapter I got from a well known German manufacturer was too short, and focussed way past infinity. The replacement they sent me two days ago will not focus past 10 meters, so back into the box it goes. I'm sure they will eventually get it right.
    I think I may just ask for a refund at this point...

  23. #23
    Ranger 9
    Guest

    Re: Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

    Quote Originally Posted by monza View Post
    *They need a proofreader: "To maximize the performance of the image sensor, the camera must be designed so that the light is straight even on the periphery of even on the periphery of the image sensor surface."
    Obviously that section was added by the Department of Redundancy Department. I liked the diagram headed "TELECENTRIC OPITAL SYSTEM," too. (If I had laughed any harder, I might have gotten hurt badly enough to have to go to the opital myself.)

    Of course they're very smart people for whom English is not a native language. But it still would have been astute to have a fluent English-speaker give it a dekko.

  24. #24
    Workshop Member Woody Campbell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    2,120
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    66

    Re: Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

    I'll probably get flamed for this but . . . shooting a g1 with a 28 chron side by wide with an M8 and a 50mm lux under controlled conditions gives very similar results to what Sean and others have seen. If you own an M8 I see no reason to have a G1, at least until the 20mm pancake is released and proves itself.

  25. #25
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,848
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

    I see no need for flaming. But it's probably premature to draw any conclusions.

    What is needed is for some easy testing of as many lenses as possible, to determine which ones exhibit the problem, and to what degree.

    In my own tests (as well as others I have spoken to) this isn't an across the board problem with all M lenses.

    The 40 Nokton seems fine from my own testing. The 50 ZM Planar seems fine (not my test.) I have been perusing flickr and downloading 'original' size images for a look-see. In the few examples I've inspected so far, the CV 12 seems fine (some edge degradation but nothing major to me), as well as the 35/1.2 Nokton. This of course is unscientific as some of the images could be cropped, which is why a group test effort is in order. Preferably done by people who own both M8s and G1s, I might add.

    Now, on to more flickr research.

  26. #26
    Senior Member m3photo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    1,043
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    28

    Re: Cosina-Voigtländer Nokton 50mm f/1.5

    Quote Originally Posted by scho View Post
    Hard to judge from a 3-D target like the coiled snake, but the lower right and left corners look a little weird.
    Well, I know it's not the typical brick wall test shot but a real life image is what we go out and photograph and hope to get good results from our equipment when we do.
    The lower right and left corners look "a little weird" as you say because as I said it was shot at f/1.5 and as it's through glass you can see the snake's pushed up against it.
    My idea when posting this image was to show an example of a non-Lumix lens working correctly at both sides even when opened up completely so as to dissipate the worry that all such lenses might be prone to aberrations in this respect.

  27. #27
    Senior Member m3photo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    1,043
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    28

    Re: Proof reading...

    Quote Originally Posted by Woody Campbell View Post
    . . . shooting a g1 with a 28 chron side by wide with an M8 and a 50mm lux under controlled conditions .
    "Side by wide"? Is that instead of "side by telephoto"? ;-)

  28. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    1,309
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

    OT: Replying to post 16 here. It seems as I can't view the thread in Threaded view and click the Quote button: doing so make the forum software pop up another post (quoted).

    Peter: No, I'm not 100% sure the adapter doesn't degrade the corners. But I am as sure I can be as a non technical guy... As I said, the adapter is a lens holder adding nothing but air. You can also see the corners, sharp and nice, when stopped down. I wouldn't blame the adapter.

    Seeing your images at first I was sure it was veiling flare due to an old Summilux construction. Now you say you don't get corners looking like that when using the lens on your M cameras. That again make me suspect the angle of the light rays. That's not a new topic - but certainly a disappointment as I thought the problem was solved now with the new flatter sensor designs. Maybe it isn't solved, I don't know and would like to see some input from somebody with more knowledge.

    So, I'm just stuck with my claims and question marks from my earlier reply (post #9).

    In worst case we are facing a situation, as Martin hints in post #20, where we are better off with Panasonic G lenses only. Should that be it I'm not sure what to do with my G1...

    regards, /Jonas

  29. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    413
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

    Hi Jonas, I understand what you're saying. I too would like people with more insight than me to come forward and explain what's going on here.

    Trying to reply to your thoughts one by one:

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonas View Post

    Peter: No, I'm not 100% sure the adapter doesn't degrade the corners. But I am as sure I can be as a non technical guy... As I said, the adapter is a lens holder adding nothing but air. You can also see the corners, sharp and nice, when stopped down. I wouldn't blame the adapter.
    I'm thinking maybe there are different things going on at the same time, e.g. CA in the corners, reflection from the inside of the adapter while using large apertures, and no communication between the lens and the camera. Most likely, there are more factors at work here that I haven't thought of.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonas View Post
    Seeing your images at first I was sure it was veiling flare due to an old Summilux construction. Now you say you don't get corners looking like that when using the lens on your M cameras. That again make me suspect the angle of the light rays. That's not a new topic - but certainly a disappointment as I thought the problem was solved now with the new flatter sensor designs. Maybe it isn't solved, I don't know and would like to see some input from somebody with more knowledge.
    Right, I think eventually we as users should put together a list with lenses that can be used on the G1 and other future µFT camera's by trial and error and experimenting. Perhaps people that shoot black and white and do not watch their pictures 100% don't notice any 'problems' or maybe they just don't care. That's fine, of course.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonas View Post
    So, I'm just stuck with my claims and question marks from my earlier reply (post #9).
    Me too

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonas View Post
    In worst case we are facing a situation, as Martin hints in post #20, where we are better off with Panasonic G lenses only. Should that be it I'm not sure what to do with my G1...
    That could very well be the case indeed.
    As for me, I bought the G1 for a project where I want to shoot with the 75, 90 and 135 and perhaps even the 280 mm Visolens. So if this will turn out to work fine, I'll be content.
    That said, all in all I'm happy I bought into this system. I like the small size and weight, and as I said, I love the Summilux 25 mm

    Kind regards, Peter

  30. #30
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

    I have not read this review nor will I. Also have not read really many posts on the 28 cron on the G1 but when i was in Sedona on my way to Moab this was the combo I grabbed when we where scouting. I used John's adapter to make the connection for the 28 cron to my newly purchased G1. Now these are just playing around and nothing serious in any way in regards to testing. Obviously I would have done things different. Anyway i shot sort of wide open to around F8 and not sure which is which either but here they are processed in ACR with default sharpening and you make the call but some look pretty good to me. Have about 10 or so. Here they come
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  31. #31
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

    Some more, maybe stopped down a shade more if I recall which is not easy around 5.6
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  32. #32
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

    Honestly they look fine but so does the Kit lens and I would not go out and buy Leica glass for the G1 but the g1 serves as a nice backup for the M8 and it gives you several other nice benefits. Obviously cost a load less so theft , damage and such are not even a real worry and for the money it is damn good and i got some really nice keepers from it and the long zoom is a real advantage in the system and at 200mm really good see the Moab thread in sunset bar and you will see some long shots that are really nice with detail. Anyway thought I would post what i had, juts to add to your thought patterns.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  33. #33
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

    Just to add I shot my P25 back also and overall things look in place as they should . Did not notice any issues on the G1
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  34. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    1,309
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

    Well Guy, what you add to my thought pattern is a dosis of confusion... In your post #31 (I still can't click the Quote button or the Quote+ button when replyinh. there is the text from another post coming up if doing so) you have the second series of images with red rocks and cliffs. The sensor is small and the lens is stopped down to around f/5.6 or maybe even 8. Surely the borders of image 1,2 and 3 in that series look sharper? Image 4 look better.

    Now the images are small and not made for this purpose. I may need to wash my eyes. Whatever. What do you think about them if you look closer at your originals?

    regards, /Jonas

  35. #35
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

    @ and 3 i think I was pretty wide open of the wood piles if not wide open . Let me look atthe EXIF on shutter which usually is a hint
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  36. #36
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

    I was pretty wide open here in the first four

    1 1/320
    2 1/640
    3 1/500
    4 1/800

    Shutter speeds which indicates i was pretty wide open. We had sun but was not a blazing sun and in and out too. I most likely was around 2.8 or F4 on these first 4
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  37. #37
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    302
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

    I have been thinking about this issue, and I believe that we need to do more testing to see if this is a real world issue, or a strictly test issue.

    The forum members who have M (CV) glass, and G1's could test this on as many lenses as are available before we make any hasty decisions about the compatibility, or utility of the G1, and M, or CV lenses.

    Sean's testing is fair, and accurate for the one lens that he tested. We should see how broad a problem this really is, and how does it affect real world images.

    M or CV glass was obviously designed for film use, and the apparent periphery effects with the G1 should not come as a surprise (although the magnitude of the effect did to me!!).

    Thanks.

    Martin

  38. #38
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

    Checking the rest I did stop down more

    5 1/125
    6 1/250
    7 1/60
    8 1/250
    9 1/200
    10 1/500

    Keep a eye on the light since it was in and out but after 4 i started stopping down which makes sense to me i usually try things wide open at first than start stopping down.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  39. #39
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

    Well I agree more testing is never a bad thing and certain lenses may not work as well , that I can also see. I did shoot the 50 cron also which looked good also . See if i can find a couple of those. What i did was lent my camera to someone on the workshop since I did not like his camera and as the owner/ instructor i wanted to make sure he went home with images. So I gave him the G1 to use for 4 days, so never got the chance to really work it. But I made a 84 year old man a very happy camper and that is what counts. LOL
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  40. #40
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Fort Collins, Colorado
    Posts
    2,077
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

    Quote Originally Posted by Woody Campbell View Post
    I'll probably get flamed for this but . . . shooting a g1 with a 28 chron side by wide with an M8 and a 50mm lux under controlled conditions gives very similar results to what Sean and others have seen. If you own an M8 I see no reason to have a G1, at least until the 20mm pancake is released and proves itself.
    Woody

    I agree with the exception of using it as a backup. If the IQ is good enough there is no point in paying another $3 or $4K for a second M8. I now have two M8's but would sell one if a $599 kit would get the job done

    Woody

  41. #41
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    1,309
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

    OK Guy,

    you gave us this list:

    Checking the rest I did stop down more

    5 1/125
    6 1/250
    7 1/60
    8 1/250
    9 1/200
    10 1/500

    Keep a eye on the light since it was in and out but after 4 i started stopping down which makes sense to me i usually try things wide open at first than start stopping down.
    ...and this image which I think is image 8 and taken with the lens stopped down quite a bit:

    http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/attach...1&d=1234704747

    To me it is sharp in the center while being soft at the right border (trying to look at the focal plane which is a bit angled here). I see the same in a couple of the other images. Am I too critical or do we have a problem after all here?

  42. #42
    Senior Member Brian Mosley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,394
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    17

    Re: Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

    I'm wondering whether this is mainly to do with the angle of incidence of light on the outer edges of the frame with wide angle lenses... I haven't noticed a problem with my Hexanon lenses (57mm / 85mm / 135mm) or wide angle (and telecentric) 4/3rds lenses.

    My recommendation for wide angle shooting on the G1 would be (apart from the slow lumix kit lens) the ZD 9-18 and ZD 11-22... both are telecentric designs and have no issues.

    Kind Regards

    Brian

  43. #43
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

    Well that right side is a little close to me so that one is not on the same plane as the focus which looks to me on the left rocks upper. The one with the log and red rock is dead on straight see if the right side is bad
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  44. #44
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonas View Post
    OK Guy,

    you gave us this list:



    ...and this image which I think is image 8 and taken with the lens stopped down quite a bit:

    http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/attach...1&d=1234704747

    To me it is sharp in the center while being soft at the right border (trying to look at the focal plane which is a bit angled here). I see the same in a couple of the other images. Am I too critical or do we have a problem after all here?

    There could be a issue. Hard to tell without specifically shooting for that. Some look fine stopped down but we are dealing with DOF too and or lack of it on others.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  45. #45
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    1,309
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

    Guy: There could be a issue. Hard to tell without specifically shooting for that. Some look fine stopped down but we are dealing with DOF too and or lack of it on others.
    Yes. Now I think I see this in image 7 and 8 as well (numbers wrong? the two ones preceeding the one we just talked about.

    I agree that some more controlled testing is needed.

  46. #46
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    1,309
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian Mosley View Post
    My recommendation for wide angle shooting on the G1 would be (apart from the slow lumix kit lens) the ZD 9-18 and ZD 11-22... both are telecentric designs and have no issues.
    Of these lenses the ZD9-18 is of interest to me. The samples at Imaging resource (@9mm) didn't impresse though - the corners are soft! Andthat with the lens stopped down to f/7 and f/8. I have also followed discussions at DPR about corner softness (with E-xx cameras).

    Brian, are there other better samples available, perhaps taken with the G-1?

  47. #47
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

    Here is the WATE and pretty sure this was at 16mm setting shutter 1/320 and the corners look pretty good, not the same as the center but not far off either focus point is most likely dead center. Now the bottom is slighter closer to me also. Again wish i knew there may have been a issue i would have shot for it

    The second one is at 1/640 with the WATE and looks like 5.6 and the corners look good. Trying to find images straight on which normally i never shoot
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  48. #48
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,848
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

    Controlled testing is what is needed. It certainly doesn't hurt to look at existing photos; but it only gives part of the story.

    I looked through perhaps 100 photos on flickr taken with many different M lenses last night, downloading the largest sizes and zooming in.

    I was not able to find anything that was out of the ordinary, but before I reach a conclusion it would be helpful for those who have G1s and M lenses to do some controlled tests.

    For that matter, I suppose it would be helpful to test everything, not just M lenses, but other adapted lenses. I have done so, and I have been unable to duplicate the issue.

  49. #49
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,848
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

    Regarding flickr, this Japanese gentleman has an impressive array of lenses. Here is a 35 'lux example, taken with the G1:

    http://flickr.com/photos/yoshinori_k...7610940630628/

    I went through over 100 of his photos, many of which are probably good tests as they have details of buildings, etc. all the way to the corners. There is one shot using a ZM 18/4 straight on to the wall of a building...exactly the sort of shot that would make corner 'smearing' quite obvious.

    EDIT: Here is the ZM Distagon shot. Download the 'original' and zoom in. No smearing here...

    http://flickr.com/photos/yoshinori_k...7610940630628/

  50. #50
    Senior Member Brian Mosley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,394
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    17

    Re: Sean Reid's observations on M mount lenses on the G1

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonas View Post
    Of these lenses the ZD9-18 is of interest to me. The samples at Imaging resource (@9mm) didn't impresse though - the corners are soft! Andthat with the lens stopped down to f/7 and f/8. I have also followed discussions at DPR about corner softness (with E-xx cameras).

    Brian, are there other better samples available, perhaps taken with the G-1?
    I haven't checked the samples you're quoting here - I only have my own experience which shows the 9-18 being extremely sharp right into the corners. Unfortunately I'm not a professional tester so will be happy to wait for dpreview to prove me right

    Could be sample variation - or amateurish testing.

    Kind Regards

    Brian

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •