This blog is a user's perspective on the Micro Four Thirds camera system. While I intend to keep the contents fact based, there are many areas where no objective truth is available, and hence there is room for different opinions and discussions. I would like to encourage you to contribute with your own experiences or opinions to this blog through the comments fields.
The Micro Four Thirds system was announced jointly by Olympus and Panasonic on August 5th, 2008. The first camera model was launched in November the same year.
Since this time, a number of cameras and lenses have become available for this system. While you can use Micro Four Thirds Olympus lenses with Panasonic cameras and vice versa, they have effectively made two different subsystems due to a different approach to optical image stabilization (OIS): Olympus cameras have images stabilization based on sensor shift inside the body, and no lens based OIS. Panasonic, on the other hand, do not use sensor shift image stabilization at all, but rather employ OIS through some lenses, by having some moving lens groups that are intended to cancel the negative effect of camera shake. These Panasonic lenses are denoted with the trademark "Mega O.I.S.".
Hi,
ReplyDeleteGreat blog - many thanks for the very helpful commentary you provide. As a bit of a newbie can I be cheeky and ask for your advice, please? I am very much enjoying my G2, currently with the 20mm pancake and the 14-42 kit. What I really love is landscape photography however, so I'd like to add a lens best suited to that.
Do you think I would notice sufficient benefit from changing to the 14mm pancake, or is there another better option I should look at? Or should I wait until the true wide pancake you speculate on is released? (bearing in mind I am not very patient hahah).
Many thanks for any help you can offer!
Nick
I don't think that adding the 14mm for landscape will give you much added value. You already have the 14-42mm, which covers the same focal length.
ReplyDeletePut the kit lens in the widest setting (14mm), and you'll see what the 14mm pancake will do. The pancake gives slightly larger aperture, but that it not needed for landscapes, anyway. For landscapes, you would probably stop down to f/5.6 for the extra depth of field and sharpness.
For landscape photography, I think you should retain the kit lens, be sure to stop down the aperture to f/5.6-8. A more obvious purchase is a tripod. This is useful for longer exposures, and easier working with composition.
Thank you for indulging my rather preposterous question! Very useful. On reflection and some further reading, and given my equal liking for architectural shots, maybe the Olympus 9-18mm M-Zuiko lens would be a good addition? I'm often frustrated at shots taken in confined urban areas and I simply can't justify the expense of the Panasonic 7-14 ultra-wide... but the Olympus seems to stack up some good reviews at a more moderate price. It's Christmas wish-list time, you see ;-)
ReplyDeleteCheers
Nick
A wide angle zoom is generally useful for landscapes. The two lenses you mention are both good, and it comes down to how much money you want to spend, and how extreme wide angle you'd like to use.
ReplyDeleteThanks, I'm enjoying reading the blog! Am a new G2 owner with the kit zoom, considering the 20mm pancake for low-light and bokeh.
ReplyDeleteI briefly tried the 14mm lens and was alarmed that Panasonic may be spoiling their fine reputation. This lens suffers from purple fringing and the edge sharpness is not good. I have also noticed a little barrel distortion. Stick with the 14-45 zoom or for compact use and large Av the 20mm f1.7.
ReplyDeleteI can agree that the Lumix 14mm lens is not as good optically as the Lumix 20mm lens. However, I would not say it is bad, and I think that most people will rarely have any problems with the issues you mention.
ReplyDeleteI do agree, however, that the benefits of the Lumix 14mm f/2.5 pancake over the kit lens are not so many. Primarily, the size and weight. If the size of the kit lens is not a problem, then you might as well stick to it, rather than buying the 14mm pancake in addition.
You are doing a fantastic job and a great service to the Micro Four Thirds community with this blog!
ReplyDeleteI like your blog so much that I created a bit.ly link for it so I can share it more easily with others on social media websites:
http://bit.ly/m43pho
You can also track statistics on the link here:
http://bit.ly/m43pho+
Thank you so much for all your hard work!
Wishing you continued success,
Fred Chapman
Bethlehem, PA
hello,
ReplyDeletei read all your posts always, thanks for this useful information. I have the gf1 w/ pancake 20mm and 45-200. this night, I wanted to take some pictures of my girl with low light (only tv light), aprox from 3m distance, in the iA mode and night mode too (both with and w/out flash. The camera just COULDNT take the picture. sometimes did the long time exposition (alone in the automode), when i changed btw isos, same thing. when tried with pancake, it ok. I am so pissed of that I will buy another camera monday.
Here comes my doubt and I hope you can help me: I am at Bangkok now, should I change the 45-200 for what lenses? What is a good lens to buy for this camera? the overpriced leica 45? the 14-140? i see this 45-200 does not worth what i payed, for day it worked well but cmon, i would rather buy the nex5 with 18-200 kit and i bet it would take the picture.
next week I will be at Europe, and I want to buy a leica X1. Should I sell the gf1? or I could keep all them (since will buy nex5 on monday?)
thanks for your attention. I want to have a camera with enough gears, so I wont have situations like this, where I wanted to take a good picture and couldnt.
best regards
Marco
Marko, please don't get angry at your equipment. Just use the right lens for the job. At f/4-5.6, the 45-200mm zoom is a slow, variable aperture lens. It's totally unsuitable for indoor photography in low light. It was not designed for that purpose, so please don't get mad at the lens! :)
ReplyDeleteYour 20mm pancake, on the other hand, is a fast prime lens. It's designed for low-light photography, so of course you got better results with the pancake than with your zoom.
If you really want a fast, fixed aperture zoom which is designed for shooting in low light, you need something like a Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8. You'll need a Micro Four Thirds adapter, and you'll have to use manual focus, and it will cost you around $1000. If you're willing to spend even more, you can get one with optical image stabilization.
Good luck,
Fred
P.S. Marco, sorry I misspelled your name before!
ReplyDeleteP.P.S. The 20mm pancake is f/1.7, which is 2.5 to 3.5 f-stops faster than the 45-200mm f/4-5.6 zoom. That's a huge difference in lens speed and light-gathering power!
ReplyDeleteI absolutely agree with Fred that the 45-200mm lens is not the right lens for the job.
ReplyDeleteThere are not really any native M4/3 lenses for the kind of picture you want to take. What you need is a short tele lens with a large aperture. The closest you can get is the Panasonic 45mm f/2.8 macro lens. However, at 45mm, it is only one stop faster than the 45-200mm lens, which is not that significant.
At the time of writing, the 20mm lens is the best lens for indoor photography. So again I agree with Fred that this is the lens you'll want to use for these kinds of pictures. Get a bit closer, to about 1 meter distance, and you should get your picture.
The Leica X1 is pretty much equivalent to the GF1 with the 20mm lens, so it will not do a different job.
hi @Fred,
ReplyDeletethank you for kindly answer me. I will look for the leica 45 today, as I also want to do some macro work. Yesterday I tried to shot like 30 pics, and no one was good haha! now I see the lens really can't take pictures indoors, thank you for explain to me.
When bought the GF1, I was looking the opportunity of buying different lens for an amazing camera (yes, I took nice pics with gf1 already). But yesterday I didnt understood why couldn't, I tried different settings setup and nothing.
I will take a look at Nex-5, a 18-200 kit is something I always wanted, and I dont want to carry a dSLR around. There's a shop here in Bangkok whom trade used lens, and probably my 45-200 will help me on buying the 45 leica.
@m43photo, also thanks for the response, I didn't thought I could have so good and quick explanation from you guys so quick.
I think the x1 have bigger sensor, and maybe it could help to take pictures in low light/high iso cenario. Its expensive, and maybe if use this money buying new gears for my gf1 would be better. Lets see how the sony will behave and maybe I will keep both (nex5/gf1) and will not buy the x1.
I was looking for a pocketable camera, and both lx3 and lx5 does not seems to be much more portable than my gf1. In fact I was quite disappointed on their size, when we see in internet they seems to be much smaller, and not almost same gf1.
Thank you guys! and keep posting (as well links for your pics :D)
cheers
Marco
Since you couldn't take a picture indoor with the 45-200mm lens at all, it could be that you have set the auto-ISO limit to a too low value. Try to set the auto-ISO limit to 1600 (which is the maximum available value for this setting on the GF1). That should give you a better opportunity to take images in low light without a flash.
ReplyDeleteAnother option is to not use the iA mode, but rather the A-mode, say. Then you can set the ISO manually to 1600 or 3200. Be sure to select the largest aperture (f/4 if you are using the 45-200mm lens at 45mm zoom). That way, you should be able to take a picture indoors without a flash. But the image could be grainy (due to high ISO), and blurred (due to a long shutter speed).
The best option, given your lenses, is the 20mm f/1.7 lens.
Hello. Very interesting and useful blog.
ReplyDeleteCan I copy and paste your material to blog about photography and photographic equipment (vgripe.com)? I undertake to insert a link to the source. Are You allow?
Sorry for my English.
You cannot copy entire articles, images, and so on. But what you can do, is to quote from the blog, and provide links to it.
ReplyDeleteTo see what I mean, look at how it has been quoted and linked here or here. That is acceptable use.
But to copy the material to your blog is not acceptable.
I have exactly that meant.
ReplyDeleteOk.
Ok, that is fine.
ReplyDeleteAll very fascinating. As a newbie to DSLR I have a Panasonic Lumix G2 with 14-45 lens. I have a dilemma. Should I buy a 20mm pancake or 45-200 lens. I want to take indoor portrait photos of 6 yr old grandson plus outdoor nature shots. In addition off to Disneyland Paris with my family and want to produce best photos.
ReplyDeleteSuggestions welcomed but can't afford to buy two new lenses. One option is to sell 14-45 and buy the two new lenses.
Suggestions and comments welcomed.
For outdoor nature shots, you should be well off you your kit zoom, the 14-45mm lens.
ReplyDeleteFor indoor pictures of people, the best choice is the Lumix 20mm f/1.7 pancake lens, in my opinion. It's not a portrait lens, since it is too short. But it can be used for environmental portraits.
So my recommendation would be to keep the 14-45mm kit lens, and get the 20mm lens for indoor photos.
Wow, bery informative blog. I am doing a lot of homework before buying my first M4/3 and I am inclined to go for the GF2 with a 20mm lens. However I cant buy the GF2+20mm pack as the GF2 only comes with the 14mm. I cant even buy the GF2 (body only) and 20mm separately, because Panasonic (for some reason) does not sell the GF2 body only.
ReplyDeleteI feel therefore forced to buy the GF2-14mm package which is disappointing because I dont want the 14mm but the 20mm lens.
Do you, by any chance, have a suggestion on how I could buy the GF2 with the 20mm only?
Sorry, I can't answer your question. I agree with you that the 20mm lens is more versatile, given that you want one of the pancake lenses. The 14mm lens is more of a lens for people with special interests.
ReplyDeletejust bought my EP-2, and so far having fun with it. Have a Panasonic 20mm lens right now and looking for a good portrait lens to carry along. Any ideas ?? I understand that with a mount you can attach any 4/3 lens to a m4/3 camera body. Will it still maintain autofocus and image stabilization ? Will I have to manually set aperture if it's not a native m4/3rd ? A bit lost here....and looking for some guidance...
ReplyDeleteI think I can more easily learn how to manually focus, but think it will take more time for me to learn how to set aperture, so given that which 4/3rd lens on the EP-2 will do both and which ones will set only the aperture
A fast (large aperture) portrait lens is what the Micro Four Thirds system is missing.
ReplyDeleteYou could use the Olympus 50mm f/2 Four Thirds lens with an adapter. Using this lens on your camera, you will have auto aperture, autofocus, image stabilization. But the autofocus will be rather slow.
Another option is to use the Panasonic-Leica 45mm f/2.8 lens. It is not as fast in terms of aperture as portrait lenses usually are. And it is a bit expensive. But the focus will be much faster than with the Olympus 50mm lens.
Another thing could be to wait for the new Olympus 50mm m4/3 macro lens which is due this autumn. That could be a good lens for portraits, however, the specifications have not yet been published.
Hi m43photo, I stumbled upon your blog today. Thank you for your thoughtful and thorough reviews and articles. You are doing a great service to the micro 4/3rds photography community, especially someone like me, who just got a GH2 four weeks ago and is waiting for a great portrait lens. Also, I love all the Lego-related stuff throughout your blog! As my friend once said, "Legos are the building blocks of childhood."
ReplyDeleteKeep up the great work!
Thanks for your comments! I, too, am waiting for the portrait lens. I think the Olympus 45mm f/1.8 will be the solution for me. No OIS with the GH2, so recording videos might be difficult handheld.
ReplyDeleteJust like many others, your advise on the various aspects of mft photography are very helpful. My new G2 with the kit lens should be on its way to me soon. Besides the downloaded manual(which does not say much except the features), I'm looking for an internet resource wherein I can find information on ways to get the best out of this camera. I also have a legacy nikon 50mm 1.8. Any advice is greatly appreciated. I'm fairly new to this field though i used a P&S extensively. Thanks
ReplyDeleteThank you so much for putting together this blog. I was debating the purchase of a 30mm Sigma f/1.4 when I found your 20mm Lumix vs 30mm Sigma article. I kept reading from there and you have answered many questions I've had about lenses and equipment for my GF1.
ReplyDeleteThank you again,
Ryan
Hi. I'm currently using Panasonic Lumix G1 with the standard kit lens 14mm-45mm and I'm thinking of getting the Lumix 20mm f1.7 for potrait and street shooting. However I was told that with this lens, I would probably have to be quite close to the subject and a better alternative is to get the Olympus Mzuiko 45mm f1.8.
ReplyDeleteWould appreciate your kind advice.
The Lumix 20mm f/1.7 is a good lens. But it is not a portrait lens.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your source that says that you need to get quite close for a portrait with the 20mm lens. 45mm is better suited for traditional head-and-shoulders portraits.
However, you may very well mean something else with "portrait". For example, you could use the 20mm lens for environmental portraits, for which I think it is good.
Hi there,
ReplyDeleteI just got a GH2 and I'm thinking about getting a Panasonic Leica D Series 14-50mm. I'll need an adapter to use it and I'm wondering if the autofocus will work while shooting video. From your tests it looks like the autofocus works much more slowly than with the conventional MFT lenses. Is that the case?
Thanks,
Dave
Hello, I haven't used the Panasonic Leica D Series 14-50mm at all, and don't know the AF speed of this lens. However, I would guess that the focus speed is worse than M4/3 lenses. AF during video is probably not feasible with that lens.
ReplyDeleteThank you! Thank you! This is a wonderful website.
ReplyDeleteThis is a wonderful website! Very interesting ...
ReplyDeleteA question: I need a lens (Canon, Minolta, Nikon ... and so on ...) with f/1.2.
What's the best choise without to spend too much?
Thanks ...
Luca
Hi,
ReplyDeleteGreat blog!! I am planning to get the GF3 w/ 14-42x kit very soon. Just wondering if you have tested out the 14-42x lens, and what are your thoughts on it, compared to the 14mm pancake lens. If you can let me know your thoughts, that would be great, as I am torn on which lens to get with my GF3. I like taking crisp night time pictures, and I am also planning to buy the 100-300mm panasonic telephoto lens soon after as well.
Thanks,
I haven't used the Lumix X PZ 14-42mm compact zoom lens. From what I have read, it appears to have a good performance, and I don't think you will be unhappy with it.
ReplyDeleteWould like to see a blog posting on the new Panasonic GH2 firmware update and its new features, etc. http://panasonic.jp/support/global/cs/dsc/download/fts/dl/gh2.html
ReplyDeleteIve a panasonic G1, I notice a few people here are looking for a good portrait lens.....I was on a tight budget looking for a fast portrait lens, I ended up buying an old Minolta MD 50mm/f1.7 lens on ebay......plenty of them there for around 30-50 quid along with an MD-micro4/3 adaptor for a tenner, I was lucky and got the whole package for under 50 euros. Picture quality was great, can achieve a very good bokeh effect..manual focus only, but well worth it
ReplyDeleteHello and thanks for this very interesting for your blog, a gracious and enthusiastic contribution to a worthy cause!
ReplyDeleteI'm new to the world of micro 4/3 and I have a question on the issue of legacy lenses. I have a Panasonic GH1, and, with a Minolta MD/MC adapter I am trying to use a Vivitar 70-300 Zoom lens. It works as a telephoto lens with a very good image but not as a zoom. The big zoom ring only serves to focus. Is this normal? Can one use legacy zoom lenses ?
I'd appreciate any advice.
Thanks,
Pat
I'm guessing that your lens has two rings: One which controls the focus, and one which controls the zoom. So rotating either should give the effect of focusing or zooming.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, some tele lenses are single action operated: You rotate the ring to focus, and push it out/in to zoom. So you might have this type of lens. Try to pull the front section out (carfully), to see if that works to zoom the lens.
I think you'll have much more fun using the Lumix G 45-200mm, and it will most likely give you better images as well than your old Vivitar zoom.
Thanks for the advice.
ReplyDeleteI feel a bit stupid not having pulled out the focusing ring! I did try but with insufficient force as it was a bit stiff.
You're also right about the Lumix G 45 - 200 which I've had for a few days. The image is slightly sharper, but the Vivitar is pretty good and gets closer, now that I can zoom.
I picked it up for €8 so I had to try it. I also have a 50mm Minolta Rokkor which has a beautiful though slightly soft definition.
Thanks again,
Pat
Hi there,
ReplyDeleteJust wonder an EVF is valuable for a m4/3 camera? or just using the LCD? because i think LCD consumes more energy than an EVF. I havent seen any post of you regarding viewfinder. It'd be more than appreciated if you could advise.
Thanks in advance.
Well, there is no need to buy an EVF if you are happy using the LCD screen.
ReplyDeleteOne advantage of the EVF can be during bright sunlight, when the LCD might be difficult to see.
Some external EVF also have a better resolution than the LCD screen, and might be easier to use for focusing. But the external EVF's are different, so you might want to check that in advance.
Hi! Great blog, I spent some time here ;] Maybe one thing - if you could wrap posts (use "read more" feature) it would be easier to scroll down when looking at archives with long posts ;) best wishes!
ReplyDeleteI have the GH2 with the 14-140. Am going on safari in Africa and was thinking the 140 (280 equivalent) might be adequate. Could use the extra tele conversion to go to 560 equivalent in a pinch. Just don't think I'll use th 100-300 enough to justify the purchase. Any thoughts?
ReplyDeleteIt depends on how close you can get to the animals and other things you want to photograph during the safari. If you can get quite close, then no problem with the 14-140mm.
DeleteHowever, I think that you can generally never get as close as you want during a safari, which is why a long lens is usually preferred.
I'm sure you could use the 14-140mm lens all the time, and come back with many good images. But with the 100-300mm lens, I think you could generally get even more interesting pictures.
I recently visited Jamaica Bay outside of New York to photograph some birds. I brought the Lumix X 45-175mm compact tele zoom to save space. I was able to get some ok video shots, but pretty much all the time I regretted not having brought the Lumix G 100-300mm lens.
Thanks! Great site.
Deletem43, I like the GH2 because it is a great camera for photo and video on one device only. Also because it is light and lenses are lighter and cheaper than the Canon and Nikon.
ReplyDeleteBut it frustrates me especially in the absence of high speed sync and the lack of tethered in lightroom. Moreover, still for still photos can not reach the quality of a 7D for example with this sensor.
Do you think the GH3 will overcome all weaknesses of the GH2?
I have previously speculated about the GH3.
DeleteI think there is no way the GH3 can solve all the weaknesses of the GH2. But it will be an incremental improvement, I think.
I love my GF-1 and have the 14-45mm and the 20mm pancake. Recently got the latter, love it already. I am having a lot of fun reading your blog. I can't recall when I last took my Nikon SLR out. The little M4/3 spoils you rotten, doesn't it? I realize it has its limits, but I concentrate on what it CAN do, not what it can't. And that's a very great deal.
ReplyDeleteHi,
ReplyDeleteCongratulations on this blog. You make it very easy for all of us to understand m43 and provide with clear and very helpful guide into this technology.
I am about to purchase a m43 camera. After several hours of research I have pretty much decided to go with Olympus.
I am an amateur photographer and have been using a Nikon D50 for several years. The D50 was the cheapest DSLR on the market but I think most people agree that it offered an immense of value for the money.
anyway, I am tired of carrying around bulky cameras.
So, now comes the tricky bit.
OM-D EM-5 or the brand new PEN E-PL5 ???
As I learned from your blog, the lenses are maybe the most important bit. But I am also considering to try a converter for my old Nikkor lenses. (I have the Nikkor 50mm f1,8 lens)
Most of my photograpy is during holidays. (Landscapes, buildings, people on the street, animals etc...)
I would guess the Zuiko 45mm is what most people recommend, but I am afraid I will never be able to take a proper landscape picture.
Also, for me the whole point of switching to m43 is to have a compact camera I can keep in my pocket but still allows me to take great pictures and offer me a lot of control as if I were using my trustworthy D50.
So bottom line questions.
Should I buy OM-D or PL5?
Buy them with kit lens or body only?
If body only, what lens to get?
If anyone has some solid advice for me, I would greatly appreciate it!
thanks!
I don't have experience with any of the cameras E-M5 or E-PL5. I think it depends on if you want to have the eye level viewfinder or not. If you prefer the eye level viewfinder, as you have in your Nikon D50, then go for the E-M5. If you are more happy composing the image while looking at the rear LCD screen, then the E-PL5 would do.
DeletePersonally, I prefer to have an EVF, that's why I chose the GH2 over the other alternatives. The E-M5 was not available at that time.
As for the lens: If you are only planning to buy one single lens, then I would go for a kit with the lens included. Both the Olympus 14-42mm and 12-50mm are fine, with the latter having slightly more features. The macro option of the latter is probably fun to use, so I would go for that if it is within your budget.
Most people would say that a landscape lens is a lens which is fairly wide. Of course, you could take landscape images with a longer lens as well, like the Olympus 45mm f/1.8. But one of the kit zoom lenses (14-42mm and 12-50mm) would be generally more useful.
tusen takk for hjelpet!
DeleteMuch appreciate you made time for my question!
Mvh,
piet
Fredrik (and anyone else reading this):
ReplyDeleteI've been working on a new project that I'm calling speculess (from latin "speculum" meaning mirror and the obvious play-on "mirrorless") which I hope grows into quite the useful resource for m4/3 photogs.
I'm looking for experts like yourself to populate the project with user impressions of the various lenses. Once we've generated plenty of content the novice photog can go to speculess and get a quick sense of the community opinions of each lens. Further, you can use speculess to drive traffic to your site.
We all really value your blog and I'm hoping I can leverage your experience for this new resource.
Thanks in advance for anyone who helps out!
-Quentin (www.speculess.com)
FYI for anyone who comes upon this later: 5 months on, and all this speculess guy seems to have is a list of products with links to amazon, presumably to earn a sales commission. Presumably he wants to outsource (take advantage of) getting actual useful info from great sites like this one. Appears to be a waste of time.
DeleteI'm using a GH-1 and both the 14-42 and the 20mm pancake lenses. A friend thought firmware updates would make auto-focus easier. Does anyone have an opinion of information on this?
ReplyDeleteYes, some firmware upgrades have in fact given faster autofocus.
DeleteHei, vet du om kitløsning med GH3 + 14-140 mm er oppdatert med den nyeste utgaven av optikken? Eller får man kun den gamle optikken med GH3 som kit...
ReplyDeleteNår du kjøper GH3 i pakke med 14-140mm, så er det den gamle versjonen av objektivet du får. Men her bør du kunne forhandle med butikken: Jeg er sikker på at de vil være interessert i å selge deg GH3 pluss den nye 14-140mm-versjonen til en fordelaktig pris. Tross alt snakker vi om ganske kostbare saker, og GH3 er knapt noe volumkamera.
DeleteJeg vil absolutt anbefale den nye versjonen av 14-140mm-objektivet framfor den gamle. Den er langt bedre.
Hmf, det er jo teit at de ikke oppdaterer kitløsning med det nyeste objektivet. Hvis du kjøper G6 derimot kan du få den med en 14-140 f3,5-5,8. Espen
DeleteHi
ReplyDeleteCongratulations for that blog and thanks for the info and the kindly way you give and comment them.
I joined the m4:3 world some time ago, actually I'm having fun with a G6 together with 14-42 and 20mm as well.
I read some articles and comments about new Sony a7/7r which state this new systems are going to erase m4:3 world, as they can povide a full frame sensor packaged in a small and light body. The price is set quite high but new models is expected to be issued.
What is your opinion? Thanks
Marco
Sony have done a great job on the A7 and A7R cameras. They are remarkably compact, considering that they are full frame cameras. On the other hand, the lenses are quite large, expensive and heavy. Also, there are only very few lenses available for the system at this point.
DeleteHowever, the big question is: Do you need full frame cameras? The main difference is that full frame cameras can give you more selective focus, thinner depth of focus. So you can blur the background more. Personally, I don't think this is needed. I'm quite happy with the selective focus possibilities of Micro Four Thirds. More often I have the need for more depth of focus, not less.
Full frame cameras can in theory give you somewhat better high ISO capabilities and better dynamic range. But I am personally quite happy with what the newest Micro Four Thirds cameras give.
And the lens lineup for Micro Four Thirds is very good now. Go to Sony A7(r), and you'll find much less lenses available.
Awesome Blog! Can anyone help me with info about Panasonic Lumix DMW-FL360 flash unit?
ReplyDeleteCan i take sequence like 5.6fps with the gh3 continuos shooting while flashing? If yes,which is the shutter sync?
Hello, I have used this flash unit, and I have written about it here.
DeleteWhen you connect a flash to the GH3, continuous drive mode is not allowed. So even if you select continuous drive, you have to press the shutter once for every exposure.
That said, you can take pictures in a very quick sequence with the FL360 flash unit. Given that you can press the shutter button fast enough, you can do many exposures per second.
But please note that the flash is medium sized, and does not have a lot of power. So this works the best if you direct the flash directly at the subject, keep a close distance, use a fast aperture, or set a high ISO. Otherwise, you will drain the flash power reserve fast.
And regarding the flash sync speed: You can have a maximum of 1/160s flash sync speed with the GH3. However, the FL360 has a high speed flash mode which can sync even faster, up to 1/4000s. But the higher you set the shutter speed in this FP mode, the faster you will drain the flash power. So you will not get as many shots in a series this way.
DeleteThank you ~ you have a fantastic blog!!
ReplyDeleteI have two lens questions for you. I *love* my f/4.0-5.6, 45-200mm with my G7 (and have the kit lenses for G1 and G7, as well as the f/1.7, 20mm H-H020.) Can you address two questions about the non-M43 Leica lens on the Lumix FZ-200 (my wife's camera) in comparison to the near equivalent M43 lenses?
The FZ-200 has a Leica branded f/2.8 lens that maintains a constant f/2.8 throughout its 25-600mm range. It's got good reviews, and I can attest, it is a fine camera.
First, can you address the depth of field question we have. The aperture can close down to f/8 max. She says this limited range sacrifices DOF. However, I think the DOF is not sacrificed so much, and that is because the lens is fast. I can shoot nice DOF in comparison to my 45-200 that goes to f/22, so I am wondering how much this lens is curtailed, and why not that much? What do we/I not understand? ("Who's right?")
Second, why is it that any M43 lens that comes close (or will, with the 2014 Olympus Pro lens coming out) to the FZ-200's f/2.8 constant aperture across the 25-600mm range, cost two to three times more than the entire FZ-200 camera? Why can a camera have a Leica f/2.8-8/25-600, at around $600, but comparable lenses alone are so much more expensive? Why don't we have a similar lens at an enthusiast (not pro) price? (If I could get it for my G7, I would.) The FZ-200 has OIS, so that's not it.
Steven Z.
Alameda CA
Hello, the FZ200 is fundamentally different from M4/3 in that it has a smaller sensor. This means that one can more easily design one "do it all lens" for it. Read more about it in the introduction here. That is why there is no comparable lens for M4/3: It is not possible to contruct, since M4/3 has a larger sensor size.
DeleteAnother way in which the sensor size affects cameras, is just DoF. With a smaller sensor size, like the FZ200, you get a deeper DoF, so that more is in focus at the same time. Hence, there is not so much need to stop down the lens with the FZ200: You already get a generous DoF already at f/2.8.
When the FZ200 stops at f/8, it is due to diffraction: Stopping down further would just generate more blur due to the diffraction phenomenon, so there is no point in offering smaller apertures.
With M4/3, you can stop down further before diffraction becomes a significant problem, that is why you can set smaller apertures with your 45-200mm lens. But generally speaking, one would avoid using smaller apertures than f/11 or thereabouts, unless you really need it for a deep DoF.
Thanks for explaining both answers so clearly. I told my wife I was right :) ...she is not being robbed of DoF just because her lens stops at f/8... and the little sensor reason why.
DeleteSo to help me understand further, if the sensor size is equivalent, but you have different telephoto lenses (e.g. 45-90 and 40-200 mm), AND both lenses are set at the same focal length / object distance and aperture, then you will have the same DoF? (I think not.... based on looking at DoF calculators, but I don't understand clearly.)
The DoF depends on a lot of factors: The sensor size, the focus distance, the focal length, and the aperture. If you use the same camera, the same focal length, the same aperture and the same focus distance, you are going to get the same DoF.
DeleteDo Oly lenses suppprt CA correction on Pana bodies?
ReplyDeleteNo, not at all. Not yet, anyway.
DeleteAnd vice versa Pana lenses on Oly bodies, any CA correction here? Also, I have read that some lenses / bodies might have "radial vignette correction" in addition to the geometric lens correction?
ReplyDeleteAs I understand, only the premium Olympus E-M1 supports CA correction when using Panasonic Lumix lenses.
DeleteAs a GH3 owner, I've been an admirer of your technical expertise for more than 2 years and would like to ask for you help with the following, please.
ReplyDeleteIn a novel I’m writing, a tiny camcorder secreted at the bottom of a canvas shoulder bag is connected to a miniature circuit board (via a micro-USB cable) hidden midway behind a canvas patch on the front edge of the bag. The camcorder, via the circuit board, controls a digital camera module with a wide angle lens hardly bigger than a match head, and also a digital high-sensitivity mic even smaller.
1. Is this a feasible set-up using a USB cable?
2. And is it feasible to say the camcorder employs auto white balance to the video sent from the camera module?
Thank you,
John Boyd
I think what you are describing here is possible, and probably exists. However, it is way into the "secret service", or "spy shop" market segment, not ordinary consumer electronics.
DeleteTo get a view of what exists today, try to search for something like "body worn spy cameras".
I'm not sure that USB is the preferred connection for miniature devices like this. Perhaps wireless Wifi connection is more feasible?
Oh, and auto white balance is certainly feasible here. Virtually all digital imaging systems need some form of auto white balance.
DeleteFredrik--This is helpful. Thanks so much.
ReplyDeleteI think the blog is great and has lots of useful information. I have a question, I am considering 3 cameras to create videos. I am a professional photographer with limited video experience (but have clients asking for video). I am considering a Sony A6500, Fuji X-T2 and Panasonic G85 or may wait for GH5. Do you have a preference for video quality, ease of use, auto focus speed, etc. I know it's a complicated area, but would love to hear your opinions.
ReplyDelete