The Micro Four Threads Third

Cosina-Voigtlander also announced a 17.5/.95 (equivalent of 35mm) manual focus lens.

― Kiarostami bag (milo z), Thursday, February 9, 2012 4:10 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

wait for m43?

Indeed. Probably $600-700, I'd guess.
I'm not too sure about the usefulness of super-fast MF glass for those systems, tbh. Very thin depth of field and magnification being the only reliable way to manually focus is a weird combo.

yeah I think those lenses are useful as 1.) baubles to be admired and 2.) shooting in the faint light

the olympus 17/2.8 will take you 90% of the way there, the panny 20mm/1.7 will take you 105% the way there (i.e. will probably outshoot the 17/0.95 at all apertures head to head)

http://www.43rumors.com/hot-voigtlander-announces-the-new-amazing-17-5mm-f0-95-lens/

oh, whoa, $1300 Euros if that's right

Baubles OTM. Lots of the C-V lenses coming out these days seem like gear for fetishists.

I owned a CV m-mount 35mm/1.2 for about two minutes. great lens, great build quality, but jeez it was so big and heavy and not worth carrying around over a tiny canon 35/1.8

Got a 20mm pancake lens and some filter for GH2 this weekend, much happier now. Thing is p. dope, imo

has anyone used anamorphic lenses/adapters? how was it 4 u

the OM-D E-M5's image stabilization looks pretty amazing for video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SimZkKidsHE&hd=1

no?

too distracted by the shoulderblades

but yes

doing this now

http://osgfilms.com/hack-the-panasonic-gh2/

anyone got the G3?

I got one for my mom last week, with the kit 14-42mm as her X100 couldn't keep up with her corgi and the OM-D was going to be out of a reasonable price range for corgi photos.

It's very light and feels pretty chintzy, the touchscreen is just so-so in responsiveness, there are a lot of menus and settings that are pretty confusing even for me. The EVF is definitely not as good as the one in my X100 or the new OM-D, pretty laggy and seemingly grainy. For what she paid ($579 w/ lens) it's a fine deal, though, and I suspect with one of the good prime lenses (20/1.7 or 25/1.4) the whole thing would work just a bit better.

I used it a little when I was setting it up, but I couldn't find a good way to look at the files on my parents' Windows computers.

I seriously considered a G3 complement my GF1, but its flimsier construction put me off. I'm glad I waited long enough to see the E-M5 hit reality.

I been shooting video using a lens from my Bolex (a 50mm Fuji CCTV lens) and the Tele Conversion. This is just a screengrab of raw video, no grading obv. Check the flare!

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7182/6803857082_2acfa3dd94_b.jpg

Oh this is with the GH2.

Marionettes

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7197/6803875814_761eaf1718_b.jpg
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7065/6949985993_327a943374_b.jpg

waht is latest 4/3 news? may be in market for new camera following burglary.

OM-D

Lots of interesting new lenses have come out in the past few months, like the Olympus 75mm, 60mm macro and the Panasonic constant f/2.8 zooms. The biggest news lately is the GH3. E-PL5 looks to be pretty nice too, for high quality in a small package.

http://3.static.img-dpreview.com/previews/panasonic-lumix-dmc-gh3/images/intro-001.jpg?v=1756

wooooooooah that is an ugly camera

GX1?

GH3 is marketed as the pro-level (magnesium body, weather sealed) Panasonic. It's a good deal larger than the GH2 (or for that matter, OM-D).

I bought an OM-D, and can't be happier. It has a bit awkward ergonomics, but its 5-axis in body image stabilization is a marvel, and the Sony sensor it uses is the best in m43 land. Panasonic refused to sell Olympus sensors larger than 12mp, so Olympus got Sony to produce a downsized 16mb m43 sensor with the nearly the dynamic range and color depth of the Sony sensors used in the Nikon D800 and D7000, newer Pentax K cameras, as well as their own NEX and Alpha lineups. The OM-D lags those cameras a bit in high ISO noise, but the physics of sensor size can't always be helped.

The GX1 was widely lauded at release for being the true successor to the GF1 (rangefinder ergos with good controls). That said, its price has sunk faster than any other m43 camera to date from $800 to sometimes $400 in under 9 months. I'm definitely tempted to get a GX1 as a second body if they come down further, for conversion to full spectrum for UV/IR imaging.

The 75mm f/1.8 and 60mm f/2.8 macro are both pretty stellar lenses, though the 150mm (35mm equivalent) focal length of the 75mm is awkward for anything but outdoor portraiture. I have the 60mm, and it will outresolve my OM-D's sensor across the frame both at 1:1 distance and distance.

The Pany 12-35mm f/2.8 is pretty good (like the 7-14mm, its almost prime lens quality), but like the other non-Leica cobranded Panasonic lenses, it doesn't correct lateral chromatic aberration (purple fringing) well (Pany bodies do this via image processing). Not an issue for Olympus bodies if you shoot RAW and process via Lightroom 4. The Pany 35-100mm f/2.8 is probably similar, but at $1499 its kinda absurd. Anyone shooting at sport action focal lengths with that kind of budget would do better to get a Canon DSLR + 70-200mm L glass.

Panasonic announced a 42.5mm f/1.2 at Photokina for 2013 release. Probably the ideal m43 portrait lens (equivalent to a 85mm f/2.4 in angle of view and depth of field control) if its as good as their 20, 25, and 45 macro primes. They also announced a 150mm f/2.8, which fills a big hole in the lens lineup, and I'll be very tempted if they also make a 2x teleconverter.

BTW, it was this video review that finally sold me on the OM-D (I was looking for something with less shutter-lag than my compact):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IEEXYHWm5dM

Oh, and some useful links:

Micro Four Thirds User Forum: pretty much home base for µ43 discussion on the internet
DPReview µ43 talk: Some bright users, and some abusive ones.
4/3 Rumors: you are a gear geek, no?
Dirk Hennig's overview of all native µ43 lenses: specs and convenient links to reviews

And for OM-D:
DPReview - Getting the most out of the Olympus E-M5: a lot of useful features are hidden in the menu labyrinth
Mike Hendren - Customizing the Olympus OM-D E-M5: so many one guide isn't enough.
OLYMPUS RAW codec: need to view thumbnails of your RAW images in Windoze?

Great stuff, thanks. I'm totally sold on the OM-D. 5-axis stabilisation does look amazing in that youtube.

... and order placed.

I love mine. It's a fast, very fun camera that does a lot more than you'd expect.

Some OM-D users figured out how to use an art filter to do on demand focus peaking, so no need for NEX envy. (link to video)

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8483/8200528805_47cfd2f451_b.jpg

0.7sec, 37mm, thx 5-axis stabilisation. liking the colours too, didn't notice the pinks on the wall being quite so outstanding when i shot it.

So I've got a GF1 with the 20mm pancake. Ready for a second lens; might not buy another one for some time. Anyone have opinions on what it should be?

I'll be shooting ummm ... touristy stuff I guess: city streets, landscapes, buildings. Not action sports that's for sure.

Maybe the Olympus 45mm f/1.8 portrait lens. You already have the 40mm equivalent for street wides, obviously appreciate the benefits of primes, and like small packages. On m4/3 boards the 45 f/1.8 is considered one of the must-haves for prime shooters, wheras there's ongoing debate on the merits of 17.5, 20 and 25 for not-so-wide to normal duties. I want one (but got the 75mm instead in an insane parental gesture/loan repayment).
review, review, review, review. If you're contemplating a third lens, the fine 14mm wide pancake can be had for a song new as it was a weird kit option.

it's only a "must-have" if you're comfortable shooting that focal length

the portrait looks like it might be really useful, actually, thanks.

The 45mm is a steal for the price. I was in the exact same situation 18 months ago (GF1 + 20mm pancake) and got it as my second lens, too. Still have it.

If you don't often shoot in low light, you might check out the 60mm f/2.8 macro. A little more reach and it renders even more nicely IMO.

it's only a "must-have" if you're comfortable shooting that focal length

Can't dispute that. Its a portrait length (90mm equiv) so suited to foregrounding and isolating subjects, is a flattering perspective for human torso-up shots, but its less suited to landscapes or architecture.

Going significantly wider than the 20mm he has there's the 6mm fisheye, the 7-14mm f/4.0 (ultra-wide rectilinear zoom, pricey, no filter ring, near prime sharpness at 7mm end), the 9-18mm f/4-5.6 (light/compact collapsable zoom, kit zoom image quality), the 12-35mm f/2.8 (the Panasonic pro-spec event/walkabout zoom, nosebleed pricey, near prime image quality at 12mm end), the 12mm f/2.0 (landscape prime, pricey, metal build, well corrected, sharp to corners wide open), the 14mm f/2.5 (pancake wide prime, terrific value, needs CA correction in post), and quite a few (eight in fact) kit zooms that start at 14 on the wide end, the best regarded (for value) being the older Panasonic 14-45mm f/3.5-5.6.

The most pertinent questions I had getting a wide were just how wide I wanted to go. 7mm lends itself to quirky deep focus compositions where you have close inanimate objects foregrounded against distant context. Human figures suffer a lot of distortion at 7mm, and frame tops & bottoms can be hard to fill. 9mm is easier to compose with, but people near edges are. 12mm lends itself to classic widescreen landscapes, and the f/2 speed on the prime is useful under street lights. 14mm (28mm in 135 format) is the 63-65° angle of view that delimits the wide end of the majority of compact zoom cameras (about 20% extend to 12mm).

As you can see, its a lot easier suggesting a portrait lens than a wide lens. That's probably why I went there.

^ 9mm is easier to compose with, but people near edges are still significantly distorted.

^ also, the 14-45 zoom is more correctly the best regarded for sharpness, for value a number various flavors of 14-42 that can be had starting around $50-60 on Ebay, not so much because they're bad lenses (frankly they're about the same as current kit zooms on DSLRs) but because they were kit zooms (very common, parted out after bodies were discontinued, replaced by owners getting into primes etc).

Going wider, the 14mm is a great place to start simply because it's so cheap. Software distortion correction robs the little pancake of a lot of its edge sharpness, but it's better than any of the alternatives at even double the price. I had the 14-45mm and was happy with its performance, but sold it because it sat unused. Compact primes are so much easier to carry day-to-day.

where is all this cheap 14mm? panasonic one is still over $200 on amazon. is that cheap?

Check eBay. Mostly Asian sellers have been selling new copies as leftovers from kits. I paid the equivalent of around $150 for mine (I'm in South Korea).

oh yeah there's some on there for just over £100. should probably play with my brand new 20mm first to get a feel for whether i fancy going narrower or wider. (both, obviously.)

that 12mm is tempting as well, dammit.

I finally found this image which is a pretty useful visual guide to m4/3 focal lengths:

http://www.rahsoft.net/fov_rah.jpg

Rt click for full res. Maybe this can help Lukas decide his next paycheck's destination.

That's pretty neat! Thanks. I'm weighing a few different wide options for a nearish future purchase.

Have a bid in on the 45mm portrait, fingers crossed. Have an upcoming trip, would be fun to shoot the whole thing with a new lens.

A video of the OM-D EM-1 (the upcoming "pro" model) leaked. Its a slightly larger EM-5 + on-sensor phase detection autofocus (for 4/3 SLR lenses) + a grip:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXgS95cgUwQ

Very nice, as 4/3 HG and SHG lenses are purportedly some of the finest glass ever, but my budget will wait a couple of years for the on-sensor PDAF to trickle down to the prosumer line.

The video was pulled seconds before I clicked submit. Sorry.