ptomsu
Workshop Member
I a close to go the same path - sell my A900 after not even a year of owning. But I NEVER use it - so this tells me something.MF primary and secondary is GF1 and GF1 IR
Don't want anything in the middle
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!
I a close to go the same path - sell my A900 after not even a year of owning. But I NEVER use it - so this tells me something.MF primary and secondary is GF1 and GF1 IR
Don't want anything in the middle
Isn't there a M9 in the middle ?MF primary and secondary is GF1 and GF1 IR
Don't want anything in the middle
Fully agree - for the price of an M9 plus 2 decent lenses you can almost step into digital MF.Whats a M9. LOL
Seriously If I could afford it than yes there would be but a M9 and it's little friends that go with it is a cool 12k. No thanks. My money is in the big gun. Lock and load
Unfortunately, just as Samsung have developed their own lens mount for the NX-10, Canon/Nikon/Pentax/Sony will develop their own proprietary lens mounts for any mirrorless systems they produce. The likelihood that any of them would adopt the m4/3 mount is about the same as the likelihood that the United States adopts the metric system or switches to driving on the left side of the road.How long now before the big boys like Canon and Nikon jump on the band wagon, if they do I hope they do not introduce their own lens mount and the micro 4/3 mount stays open to use with all makes of camera.
not sure if that's where the gold is, or just we're the most vocalIt would appear that Panasonic and Olympus have come across a goldmine where new and photographers with years of experience are buying into a new system.
perhaps ... but how much of that is micro4/3 and how much is just expectable?My reason is it's light and portable, the lenses are small but optically good and do not cost an arm and a leg. Even the most expensive 7-14 can be got for £850 against the Nikon 14-24 costing £1,400, before anyone says but the Nikon is far better that is not my argument.
thanks ...Good points, Pellicle.
I see we are on the same page with this one and ...The only reason that the G1 became my most used camera with its EVF and Swivel TFT screen was because it allows me to use small manual focus primes on it with ease.
not to mention they loose the focus when power cycled ... this ****s me no end with the zoom. When I'm taking photos of things in tabletop work and I'm re-arranging something I have to check my focus every bloody time! So I don't use the zoom and put an FD on instead (that way all I have to check if the flash hasn't powered down (I figure that one out pretty quick however).Though the Oly-D17/2.8 and the Pana 20/1.7 are tiny (by most camera standards), the lack of real manual operations without battery power and poor CDAF performance put severe limitations on them for my use.
reading the review on that:I have no desire to buy/use the 45mm lens.
... and they have to put it on the adaptor to make the Oly look bigger?The petite size of the Leica macro is all the more extraordinary when you consider that it doesn't change length on focusing, in contrast to the Olympus which extends dramatically (picture here) yet only reaches 1:2 magnification as opposed to 1:1.
I'm unwilling to put away my OM50f1.8 and extension tubes just yet ... ohh, and they only cost $30 all up tooClose range test
To see how effective OIS is at dealing with shake during macro shooting, we repeated our test at a much closer distance, with an image magnification of approximately 2:1. In this case we looked at just IS Mode 1. The results from this test are pretty stark - at such close focus distances, IS is giving next to no advantage at all (which again reflected our experience in the field). It's not quite time to put away your tripod yet.
ho hum ... faux dslr ... owh ... how pwositively plaaasticThe 45mm macro is perhaps best matched to the 'faux DSLR' styled G1
do you need an assistantI have a D300, G1 (panasonic), G9, RD-1 and a FH20 (casio) in my digital stable.
....
I spend a lot of time in the studio shooting models who are nude,
as a parting shot, I used to be indecisive, but now I'm not so sure ....
I do not buy/use my gear based on that outfit (or for that matter any outfit).of course dpreviews anti G1 bias comes out again:
I'm with you on this one (except the farting ). I'll hold on to my D700 and manual lenses too, as I see them as a different tool for other work. The G1 is fun but won't replace all else I have.I'm actually (after farting about a lot with lenses this last year) tending back towards a 20D and/or 5D for more serious photographic needs and keeping the G1 as a Coolpix upgrade (though its not as solidly made) with more options ...
MF primary and secondary is GF1 and GF1 IR
Don't want anything in the middle
I also agree and I also have all my M glass.... but I know I will never end up with a second hand M9, first I don't dream of it and second the price would be still an outrage.Fully agree - for the price of an M9 plus 2 decent lenses you can almost step into digital MF.
I still have kept all my M glass so I might end up with an M9 occasionally if it is available and prices are getting somehow decent..........
Hopefully Leica will jump on that train with their future M models.
Assuming you want either the GF1 or the EPn/EPLn body because if you go with the G1/GH1 you have a nice EVF to work with. No need for an extra piece of accessory....
I can't see the back of a camera as I need reading glasses. So I have no option other than to go for the hot shoe EVF...