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!

Panasonic G9

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
I guess it uses then only the normal contrast AF system without the help of the DFD communication & database. But this just a guess. Maybe Panasonic is also collecting bokeh data from Olympus lenses to use it for their DFD system?
Why would they?
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
From what I understand it should not work properly, because for DFD Panasonic uses a special lens profile of their (Panasonic) lenses that allows the system to detect how a subject looks if it is out of focus and then take action to bring it in focus again. Since the Olympus 150/2 is not in their profile database this should not work - at least this is how I understood DFD. But I might be completely wrong ....
Thanks Peter. That's my understanding as well.
We already know that on the E-M5 and E-M5.2 PDAF, i.e. Olympus FT lenses suck AF-wise. That's why Olympus came up with the E-M1 and E-M1.2 IIRC.

Now I wonder if retroactively Panasonic updates the Firmware of all their lenses that need it so that they work with DFD. Or are all those lens profiles already built into their DFD cameras?
 
Last edited:

4711

Member
Thanks Peter. That's my understanding as well.
We already know that on the E-M5 and E-M5.2 PDAF, i.e. Olympus FT lenses suck AF wise. That's why Olympus came up with the E-M1 and E-M1.2 IIRC.

Now I wonder if retroactively Panasonic updates the Firmware of all their lenses that need it so that they work with DFD. Or are all those lens profiles already built into their DFD cameras?
That is explained in the link I posted above. Panasonic continously updates their DFD firmware with new lens data. They did not tell in that video, whether they only do this for Panasonic lenses or also for Olympus lenses.

It is all MFT after all. If I would be Panasonic and would like to have the best success to gain market share, I would not limit this to Panasonic lenses only in the long run.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
From what I understand it should not work properly, because for DFD Panasonic uses a special lens profile of their (Panasonic) lenses that allows the system to detect how a subject looks if it is out of focus and then take action to bring it in focus again. Since the Olympus 150/2 is not in their profile database this should not work - at least this is how I understood DFD. But I might be completely wrong ....
It's more than related to the lens profiles. The 4/3 lenses are designed for use with PD AF, and will work slowly with cameras that offer only CD AF even with DFD. In my experience, there's little difference in focus speed using 4/3 lenses on a modern Panasonic camera like the GX8 compared to a GH2 or GH3. With an E-M1, the improvement is dramatic.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
I disagree fully.

It is specifically this electronic reproduction of reality that gives a huge advantage, as it shows the image exactly as the sensor will take it. Sure it needs advanced EFV technology like high resolution, color accuracy, almost no lag, etc., but if this all is guaranteed then it works brilliantly. At least for me!
It is of course correct that the reproduction in the EVF shows what the sensor picks up, but that's not my point. My point is how I relate to a person in front of my camera. It's similar to looking at a person in a dimly lit room through a window compared to a brighter, real-time TV image of the same person. One is reality, one is an electronic, improved reproduction of that reality. Although the electronic reproduction is sometimes more practical to use, it's still a reproduction, and it will sometimes affect how I interact with that other person. That's important when doing portrait photography.
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
Another testimonial why m43 cameras are so great - in this video emphasising Panasonic :D

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=269&v=ZbxhDvi-q5U

I am getting hard pressed not to buy a G9 with the 100-400 in addition to my Olympus setup :banghead:
Thanks Peter. I think it's wonderful to have options.

If the hype of the G9 is true - and I hope it is - that should light the fire under Olympus' butt. Olympus needs to respond soon with an improved camera of their own, also in response to the Sony A9 that has a shutter read out time of 1/150 s.

For the E-M1.2 that parameter is 1/60 s.
What is that value for the G9?

Unless that number is very high, one would be forced to use the noisy mechanical shutter for certain scenarios. That may not be of interest for many folks, but for me it's a deciding factor in the consideration of purchasing a new camera.

I am finally also more fully appreciating the role of PDAF, CDAF, and DFD when considering an FT or MFT lens. :facesmack:
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
It is of course correct that the reproduction in the EVF shows what the sensor picks up, but that's not my point. My point is how I relate to a person in front of my camera. It's similar to looking at a person in a dimly lit room through a window compared to a brighter, real-time TV image of the same person. One is reality, one is an electronic, improved reproduction of that reality. Although the electronic reproduction is sometimes more practical to use, it's still a reproduction, and it will sometimes affect how I interact with that other person. That's important when doing portrait photography.
Jorgen, I hear you!

But for me it is exactly the opposite, just noted this when I was test shooting the D850 during an evening indoor event. The view through the really wonderful OVF was pretty dark, but what the camera did without any exposure compensation was to overexpose the image, which is kind of normal BTW also with a mirrorless camera. But with a mirrorless camera I immediately see this overexposure and can correct against - with the EM1.2 especially easy as it can be done with the front ring placed around the shutter button - till the exposure looks right in the EVF. This is not possible to see in an OVF, even the best and world class leading one's.
Sure I could easily adjust exposure compensation in the D850 and got the shots right, but I prefer the WYSIWYG approach from mirrorless by far.
 

SrMphoto

Well-known member
Can we have the OVF vs EVF discussion in a different thread (where I could write why I think OVFs are still much better than EVFs ;-). )

Anyway ... just saw this G9 advertisement video by the legendary bird/wildlife photographer Bence Mate:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9CxVkl-fL3Y

If he is willing to put his name behind that product, I am really, really seriously thinking of using G9 instead of Nikon D500/D5 for some wildlife photography. Would really like to know how G9's focusing compares to M1m2.
 

Knorp

Well-known member
It is the lenses that contribute most to the weight/space in my backpack. IMO, my M1m2, with a serious grip, handles much better than my A7rII.
True - I have the battery grips for both, but use them rarely nowadays.
By the look of it, I'm confident that the G9 without the battery grip will handle perfectly well.
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
Can we have the OVF vs EVF discussion in a different thread (where I could write why I think OVFs are still much better than EVFs ;-). )

Anyway ... just saw this G9 advertisement video by the legendary bird/wildlife photographer Bence Mate:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9CxVkl-fL3Y

If he is willing to put his name behind that product, I am really, really seriously thinking of using G9 instead of Nikon D500/D5 for some wildlife photography. Would really like to know how G9's focusing compares to M1m2.
I would say - without having used the G9 - that the G9 AF should be pretty much faster in good light but slower in low or less light. But I could be wrong. Interested to see what the first real comparisons will show.

Anyway WRT D500/D5 - I am so happy that these cameras are meanwhile fully out of comparison for me - I could not see any reason to go back to DSLRs, even if they would be a tick faster, but that weight (cameras and lenses) just turns me off. And also you do not like the EVF/OVF discussion, the EVF is a major part for me why I prefer mirrorless - at least at the stage of the EVF's current implementations.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member

Knorp

Well-known member
The big battery has to go somewhere, so the grip is difficult to avoid. In addition, I think large lenses are easier to handle with a good grip. The weight is about the same as the Sony anyway, and if you compare the lenses with 70-200 eqv. lenses, the difference is huge.

http://camerasize.com/compact/#724.392,725.627,ha,t
It's the integrated grip that seems to be just perfect IMO and that's why I'm doubting the need for that optional battery grip.
Sorry if I was not clear, Jørgen.

Krgds.
 

biglouis

Well-known member
I spent the morning shooting with my Lumix 100-400 set to 200mm to see whether you really can do birding and wildlife with a 20mpx crop sensor.

I was working towards getting the Oly 300/4 for my GH5 but now I am thrown into confusion by the 200/2.8. My heart says Lumix and my head says Oly.

Nevertheless I did manage to pull out some good bird photos at a native 200mm. One thing which had not really penetrated my thinking is the additional stops over the 100-400 at the same zoom focal length. In winter that is an important factor, e.g. being able to keep up to 1/1000-1/2000 even on a dim day.

Anyway, just in case people are wondering if 200mm (400mm equiv) can yield good results, this is about 50% of the frame with the 100-400 set to 200mm, iso800, f5.1, 1/5000 (electronic shutter).

To afford either lens I have to sell some kit or I think my wife will serve me with divorce papers :)


 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
I spent the morning shooting with my Lumix 100-400 set to 200mm to see whether you really can do birding and wildlife with a 20mpx crop sensor.

I was working towards getting the Oly 300/4 for my GH5 but now I am thrown into confusion by the 200/2.8. My heart says Lumix and my head says Oly.

Nevertheless I did manage to pull out some good bird photos at a native 200mm. One thing which had not really penetrated my thinking is the additional stops over the 100-400 at the same zoom focal length. In winter that is an important factor, e.g. being able to keep up to 1/1000-1/2000 even on a dim day.

Anyway, just in case people are wondering if 200mm (400mm equiv) can yield good results, this is about 50% of the frame with the 100-400 set to 200mm, iso800, f5.1, 1/5000 (electronic shutter).

To afford either lens I have to sell some kit or I think my wife will serve me with divorce papers :)
Number one to consider: the 2.8/200 comes with a 1.4TC that makes it a 4/280 - equals a 4/560 in FF

Number two to consider: Always follow your heart! :)
 
Last edited:

Knorp

Well-known member
Number one to consider: the 2.8/200 comes with a 1.4TC that makes it a 4/280 - equals a 4/560 in FF

Number two to consider: Always follow your heart! :)
Hopefully image quality is not too much affected by this TC.
The Oly delivers a 'clean' 4/600.
Just saying ...
 

biglouis

Well-known member
Number one to consider: the 2.8/200 comes with a 1.4TC that makes it a 4/280 - equals a 4/560 in FF

Number two to consider: Always follow your heart! :)
That did make me 'lol'. Good advice, Peter. Fortunately, there is an open day with Panasonic products next week at my local camera shop, so hopefully I can take a look. I also have an offer to take a loan of a 300/4 for three days but I'm trying to find a period where there may be some sunshine so I can hike to my favourite birding spot and give it a good trial.

Hopefully image quality is not too much affected by this TC.
The Oly delivers a 'clean' 4/600.
Just saying ...
Even with a TC the 200/2.8 has less reach than the 300/4.

The only thing I will say based on the experience of using Leica products for many years is this. With each new Leica product you wonder if they have got it wrong. The camera or the lens always seems to be slightly different to the competition. Then after a while you realise that the thinking was a lot deeper than just following the competition.

So, why a 200 f2.8 when clearly a 300/4 would compete with the Oly. Then you think: it is easier to 'up' the reach of 200 with TCs but you can't down the reach of a fixed 300 or reduce the aperture by a stop.

LouisB
 
Top