D2 vs. GF1, EP-1 or EP-2

[comapedrosa]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I don't have any micro-4/3 camera. But you probably know that I'm a passionate D2 user since 2004. My apologies if this has already been discussed elsewhere - I couldn't find any thread so far.

 

I was wondering what people who have both cameras thought of them. How do they compare and what reaction do they generate? I'm interested as much in feeling as in IQ, handling, and speed (AF, responsiveness), etc...

 

My intial thoughts - without ever having held any of the micro-4/3 cameras in my hands:

• My gripes with the D2 are 1) lack of DOF control; 2) slow AF; 3) slow responsiveness from the camera overall (starting with RAW); and as a distant 4) low resolution & bit depth.
  
• The EP-2 with Olympus color-jpegs + pana 20mm f1.7 sound like a sexy combo.
  
• I'm secretly hoping that this will get me over a 5D Mark II or a D800 purchase
  
• I already imagine i would dearly miss manual controls (i.e. set it before switching on; set it blind in the dark; etc)
  
• Most leica glass (i'm particularly fond of my old collapsible 50mm Summitar screwmount) would be way too long for the x2 factor
  
• What's with the electronic in-camera lens correction? Wouldn't this limit the types of glass one can put in front of one of these cameras? Is the pana 20mm really compatible with the Olympus electronics?
  

 

Cheers,

Coma

[comapedrosa]

*bump* No m4/3 users here? I am genuinely interested in your experience and thoughts.

[elgenper]

OK, biting... FWIW, I´ve owned the D2 for over 4 years now; for 3 of those, it was the only camera I used. For exactly the reasons you state in your first point, I first tried a Nikon D200; too much bulk and noise altogether. So I got a Panasonic G1 as soon as they came out, plus the R and M lens adapters.

 

Now, I´m back to using the D2 (also waiting for my M9, but that´s another discussion...), and the G1 resides in a cupboard. Why?

 

First, while the original zooms aren´t bad, no amount of post-processing can get their images up to what the Leica produces right off the card (not talking resolution, just IQ).

 

Second, using Leica glass with adapters is fiddly (out of the question for most moving subjects) and that 2x factor too limiting. To add insult to injury, none of my lenses below 50 perform well on the G1.

 

Third, the whole d-mn camera is too fiddly; all the time I press the wrong button or have to dig into menus to do even basic settings. And using it with gloves is a nightmare...

 

So, back to the D2. But, while I now realise it is the best camera I´ve ever owned this far, the gripes do remain. I´ve come to the conclusion that to be better than the D2, a camera will have to retain Leica glass and manual controls, while having a bigger sensor (not just more pixels, mind you!) and better viewfinder, still be small and light enough that I´ll want to carry and use it. X1 will be too limited, so the only remaining ones are M8 (used) or M9.

 

After lots of gnashing of teeth over the cost, I decided to go for the M9. But, it seems to be a long wait.... And, while waiting, I´m using my D2.

[krabat]

I only can support your statements about the Digilux 2. And simultaneously, the question goes on an on around in my head why Leica abandoned the wonderful concept of this camera. I am looking frequently if there is another camera on the market with comparable handling and IQ features and with such a brilliant lens, however, in vain.

Of course, there are cameras with more pixels, with higher ISO, a better viewfinder, and so on. But where is a digital camera with that typical opportunities of manual control, with that outstanding out-of-the-box quality of jpeg images, with that charming and time-less design?

Fortunately, my D2 is working still, and I hope it will do so during the next years.

[elgenper]

I only can support your statements about the Digilux 2.... I am looking frequently if there is another camera on the market with comparable handling and IQ features and with such a brilliant lens......

Fortunately, my D2 is working still, and I hope it will do so during the next years.

 

Indeed.... I´ve seen before that we´re both fans of the D2, and I´m certainly not planning to retire mine when my M9 arrives, nor will I get rid of my D-Lux 4 either. But my G1 gear I would sell tomorrow if I got a decent offer....

 

But, I have to admit that the "gripes" (as the OP put it) about the D2 in some cases are real, and that it would be good to have another camera beside the D2 that addresses these gripes. Many of us hoped for some incarnation of a "Digilux 4" (I refuse to consider the Digilux 3 as a pure-bred Digilux...), but it doesn´t seem to come anytime soon, and the X1 isn´t quite it either (or so it seems).

 

So, what happened to me was simply that I slowly realized that I either had to keep on trying out cameras that weren´t quite "it", like all the mFT models so far, or go straight away for the M9 and have it solved for good (in the long run, I´m not even sure it will be much more expensive than to keep on buying some new "compromise camera" every other year or so, and I already own lenses for the M9 since my film days). And, FWIW, that´s my humble advice for the OP as well: skip those "half-growns" and either work on getting the most out of the D2, or get a full-fledged Leica right away!

[laptoprob]

I don't have any micro-4/3 camera. But you probably know that I'm a passionate D2 user since 2004. My apologies if this has already been discussed elsewhere - I couldn't find any thread so far.

 

 

 

I was wondering what people who have both cameras thought of them. How do they compare and what reaction do they generate? I'm interested as much in feeling as in IQ, handling, and speed (AF, responsiveness), etc...

 

 

My intial thoughts - without ever having held any of the micro-4/3 cameras in my hands:

• My gripes with the D2 are 1) lack of DOF control; 2) slow AF; 3) slow responsiveness from the camera overall (starting with RAW); and as a distant 4) low resolution & bit depth.
  
• The EP-2 with Olympus color-jpegs + pana 20mm f1.7 sound like a sexy combo.
  
• I'm secretly hoping that this will get me over a 5D Mark II or a D800 purchase
  
• I already imagine i would dearly miss manual controls (i.e. set it before switching on; set it blind in the dark; etc)
  
• Most leica glass (i'm particularly fond of my old collapsible 50mm Summitar screwmount) would be way too long for the x2 factor
  
• What's with the electronic in-camera lens correction? Wouldn't this limit the types of glass one can put in front of one of these cameras? Is the pana 20mm really compatible with the Olympus electronics?
  

 

Cheers,

Coma

 

 

Hi, Haven't been around here since I sold my D2 a few weeks ago. I sold it after getting a Panasonic GF1 and don't regret -yet.

The Panny is smaller, with the kit lens has the same 'reach' as the D2. With the bigger sensor you can get better selective focus. With the small pancake 20/1,7 and the higher ISO performance night shots get much better. RAW is a serious option on the GF1, I never used RAW on the D2 because of the processing time needed. The D2's in-camera JPEGs are far superior, though. No problem in PP using RAW.

Handling the GF1 is great. The AF lenses focus fast, well and precise. No complaints on IQ either. Something to get used to is the 'fly by wire', the focus on the Panny lenses can be altered manually, with direct magnification if wanted. But there is no focus scale on the lenses.

Focusing manual screwmounts (or M-lenses) works well, a bit more fiddly to get to the magnified focus assist.

In-camera corrections are made for the Panny lenses. No problem there, they perform fine. The Leica- and other lenses need little correction ofcourse, you just might want to add a baffle to shield out the excess light coming in to the camera. This excess light causes soft corners, a simple baffle can correct that perfectly. I did so on my 35mm Ultron.

I was hesitating to get into 4/3 earlier because of the lack of (ultra)wides. But I managed to get a cheap 7-14 zoom. That one performs so well I sold my two Heliars and the Kobalux 21.

 

So all in all I'm very happy!

 

cheers, Rob.

[leicanut2]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I think the Gf1 is a very fun camera to use while I wait for my M9. No regrets at all. Can use my old 90c and 135 tele elmar on it.

I down sized to just the M9 ( when ever it gets here ) and a two lens kit newer 35 and 50 lux. Will use the 90 and 135 only on the gf1.

 

I hope around christmass to get to play with the x1 on demo day.

 

Jan

[AnakChan]

MobileMe Gallery

 

First 3 shots are test shots of GF1 with a Lux 35mm ASPH. I must say that I'm very happy with that combo. The colours are great, the Lux renders the background very nicely meanwhile. I don't have any Panny lenses yet (20/1.7 on the way, and seeing laptoprob's post, the 7-14 seems very interesting.

[comapedrosa]

Thanks everybody for jumping in. Looks like some good and some bad experiences so far... on my side, I just find it very frustrating that the D2 concept hasn't been continued!

 

Oh, why don't the Camera Gods give us a modern D2??

 

I'm probably going to follow Per's advice and "skip those "half-growns"!

Cheers,

Coma

[AnakChan]

Looks like some good and some bad experiences so far...

Bad experiences? Did I miss a post somewhere? So far in this thread, negative references have been about the G1, not GF1.

[comapedrosa]

Sean, you are right of course. It wasn't my intention to hurt any feelings. Am i wrong to assume that the G1 and GF1 are pretty close in terms of IQ and overall experience? if anything, i could imaging preferring the G1 because of it's good EVF (if if weren't in the wrong location )

[comapedrosa]

Oh man, oh man! This is not going to be a constructive comment - take it as nothing more than venting, but after reading about the Ricoh GXR this morning, and the lenses/sensors they decided to launch their system with, I want an M9 more than ever!

[AnakChan]

I'm so with you there man . It's frustrating the M9 has hardly reached to the Far East but seems "more easily obtainable" in the Americas and European countries. Even Australia seems to be getting more M9 shipments.

 

As for the G1 and GF1, yes you're right...the IQ's pretty similar. I think usage-wise, is somewhat different. In my opinion this new E-P1/2 & GF1 is much nicer and more appropriate for mFT. 'cos something in the size of the G1 or GH1, personally I may as well have a FF DSLR (or M9 ).

 

I just received my 20/1.7 for my GF1 which means now I can use it as my play/clubbing/party camera too. But I actually prefer the GF1 with the Leica Lux combo (35/50mm). I already have a Nikon D3/lenses, and once I've gotten the M9 (and possibly Lux 24mm?) I'd have a pretty complete set.

 

The New Ricoh GXR is pretty interesting. Actually looking at the sample photos from DPR, I must say I'm pretty impressed with its IQ! And conceptually this modular design also sounds interesting however I think it could end up being quite expensive. Still though, kudos to Ricoh.