grober Posted December 31, 2009 Share #21 Posted December 31, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Jaak, No reason to apologize. Each of us conducts our own analysis and makes our own decisions as each new camera system hits the market. No published review yet has shaken my decision: my X1 pre-order stands firm. For me, it's the perfect solution for a number of reasons not the least of which is my profound dislike of the M8's noisy shutter. I'm high on my Leica dealer's pre-order list and had hoped for one by now but it seems that everything has been pushed back for a month or so. Whatever . . . when it comes; it comes and the learning curve begins again. -g Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 31, 2009 Posted December 31, 2009 Hi grober, Take a look here Sorry guys. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
nemeng Posted January 1, 2010 Share #22 Posted January 1, 2010 FWIW I bought my GF-1 + 20mm pancake kit @ 3 weeks ago. The lens is quite good - although there is a fair bit of barrel distortion which needs to be corrected during post. I do it in photoshop using PanoramaTools plugins. Colours and dynamic range are okay. The shutter is surprisingly loud though, much, much louder than my D-LUX4. Out in the world the noise doesn't matter much, however the lens-wink during exposure is a dead-giveaway if you're trying to be low-key. No need to spend up big for the M->Micro 4:3 adapter. I bought one for $US 80 off eBay - works fine, no flare etc. The 50mm Summilux is a beautiful portrait lens. Tried the 35mm ASPH Summicron, but didn't like the faux 75mm focal length. So currently my kit is the 20mm pancake for everyday shooting and the 50mm for "short-tele" work. Was going to buy a Leica M9 but they are vapour-ware in Australia. "Just be patient". Yeah, right. Nevermind, Leica's loss has been my $AUD 8000 gain=). As for the X1... DOA I'm afraid. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TEBnewyork Posted January 1, 2010 Share #23 Posted January 1, 2010 The lens is quite good - although there is a fair bit of barrel distortion which needs to be corrected during post. I do it in photoshop using PanoramaTools plugins. What program are you using for the RAW development before Photoshop? ACR/LR/C1 should all be correcting the distortion for you. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nemeng Posted January 1, 2010 Share #24 Posted January 1, 2010 What program are you using for the RAW development before Photoshop? RPP. ACR/LR/C1 should all be correcting the distortion for you. ACR = not my version. I am still using Photoshop CS and won't upgrade until PShop v5 is released in April (or thereabouts) LR = does not do geometric lens correction C1 = you need the pro version, which overpriced bloat-ware. All I need is a RAW developer. BIBBLE, RAW Developer, Silkypix et. al.... I tried them and they all have different issues. RPP does what I need. For free (well, I paid the author a small donation to enable batch features). BTW I am perfectly happy with my RAW workflow. I just wanted to note that the Panasonic 20mm pancake lens has barrel distortion issues which - if you shoot in RAW - will have to be addressed one way or the other =) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NZDavid Posted January 1, 2010 Share #25 Posted January 1, 2010 Wouldn't it be a lot easer and save an awful lot of fuss to have a lens that doesn't have barrel distortion in the first place rather than having to correct it onscreen afterwards? Seems to be a slippery on the path to manufacturers saying (and buyers believing) any defect can be corrected afterwards with software. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nugat Posted January 1, 2010 Share #26 Posted January 1, 2010 RPP. LR = does not do geometric lens correction BTW I am perfectly happy with my RAW workflow. I just wanted to note that the Panasonic 20mm pancake lens has barrel distortion issues which - if you shoot in RAW - will have to be addressed one way or the other =) Have you actually tried LR 2.6? It does automatic CA/geometric distortions corrections on the ingest of raws from any m43 Panasonic body/lens combo. The pictures show up perfect in that respect (geometry equal to Leica glass, CA even better). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
msbel Posted January 1, 2010 Share #27 Posted January 1, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) Rarely post here and had to chime in though much has been covered. I have been buried in the X1 vs. GF1/EP2 in my head mania as many have. I bought an EP2, and returned it. Was going to take the GF1 with pancake and decided to wait for the X1. It was a personal choice. Why? IMO, the GF1 and EP1/2 are not "compact cameras" or high quality M digital/DSLR sensor competitors. They are nestled in the middle...a larger sensor than a true compact (other than the DP1/2 and X1/GXR), and not a true APS-C sensor interchangeable lens system camera. Perfect if: 1 - A Digital M is not an option - if you have M lenses from your film M bodies, then the GF1/EP1/2 could be a nice match to use them - sparingly. For me, too much of a headache for basically telephoto (2x) unless you use 24mm and under M lenses. If you have a Digital M, I see no reason to get a mFT for that use. The quality will not match the larger sensor in a Digital M, and the size of those systems makes them only a touch more portable than my M8...i.e. I still have to throw it in a bag if I do not have large coat on. Also, and EP2 runs at $1100 with only one lens, so a used M8 seems like a better choice for your M lenses if you can budget it in. The GF1 is marginally less, however, comes with no EVF to focus your M lenses unless you want to pay another $200. 2 - You are thinking of starting a mFT system long term. There are great mFT lenses from both Panasonic and Olympus now and coming out in 2010 that will make these systems on par option-wise with larger cumbersome DSLR systems - however, again, smaller sensor for mFT, not the same IQ. If you are cool with that, then I would go after a GF1 system immediately before prices and lenses are even more scarce. Portability does matter. Your call. 3 - You need swift AF - only on the GF1 right now - the EP2 AF was underwhelming. I totally see the value of quick focus on moving street scenes. My only caveat is that trying to use a LCD screen or EVF to quick focus is useless. Only an OVF (IMO) is true "vision" for that moment. Only my opinion, and you can certainly use OVF's on both mFT bodies while listening for the AF "beep". 4 - You are cool with using an EVF. The one with the EP2 is supposedly state of the art at 1.44mm pixels. Damn nice thing. However, it made me feel like I was looking through a periscope in a movie theater and could not get out. I had no idea what I was framing for a few seconds. That is my own "un-conditioning" to that way of seeing through a lens. For others, this type of shooting could be a Godsend. I do know there is NO WAY you can manually focus your M lenses effectively without one on a GF1 or using LCD live view. And finally in summary...5 - Simply, you want a larger sensor than a compact, are not hung up that these great mFT cameras are not pocket able, and just think that Leica is nuts for charging $2K for a fixed lens APS-C compact with it's hick-ups. For the same price, you could get the GF1/20mm 1.7 pancake kit, EVF, and 14-140mm (slower) wide zoom. A nice carry kit in a small Billingham bag. However, for me, my beat up M8 and 28/75 Summicrons fit in the same bag with better IQ. If I did not have those, would most likely go with a GF1 - a very nice camera indeed. For me, there is no true compact (non-mFT) out there with the IQ that would inspire me to take it out other than for snaps...save for the X1 in concept, and even then, we will see. I have a Ricoh GRD fixed 28mm EFV compact that gets close right now Thanks for listening, MB Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpmac55 Posted January 1, 2010 Share #28 Posted January 1, 2010 Excellent summary, MB. I finally placed my order for a X1 the other day. Was on the fence with a few 4/3 models but decided to stick with my original plan. I recently purchased a used Dlux4 and although it's a great camera, I don't see it getting much play when the X1 arrives. If still on the fence, I'd wait to read Steve Huff's upcoming X1 review. Steve's review approach is solely from a photographers perspective, not a scientific or lab product. He just posted a few X1 photo's and well, see for yourself: http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackart Posted January 1, 2010 Author Share #29 Posted January 1, 2010 Few examples of F1,7 20mm panvcake Our Pinchers portrait on Flickr - Photo Sharing! Winter, Snow, Brook and Light Snowfall on Flickr - Photo Sharing! Right now I'm quite satisfied. Jaak Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nemeng Posted January 1, 2010 Share #30 Posted January 1, 2010 Have you actually tried LR 2.6?. (Yawn) Yes. You cannot manually intervene and adjust the geometric correction. You gets what Adobe gives you. Also I didn't like the default conversion values (gamma, colour, sharpness) - IMO a lot of fiddling before getting the image into PShop, where you need to fiddle again. As I said before, all I need is a RAW converter - not a pseudo image-editor/ database/ program-with-90000-features-I-don't-need. Obviously YMMV =) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
giordano Posted January 1, 2010 Share #31 Posted January 1, 2010 Wouldn't it be a lot easer and save an awful lot of fuss to have a lens that doesn't have barrel distortion in the first place rather than having to correct it onscreen afterwards? Seems to be a slippery on the path to manufacturers saying (and buyers believing) any defect can be corrected afterwards with software. Depends how you look at it. Lens design is mostly a matter of trade-offs. By accepting some distortion the designer can improve other aspects of performance without increasing the size or cost - or make the lens smaller or cheaper without compromising other aspects of performance. Conversely distortion can be more effectively corrected in software than most aberrations, especially if the software takes the lens characteristics into account. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
msbel Posted January 1, 2010 Share #32 Posted January 1, 2010 Thanks JPac...I am also on a list with a retailer for an X1. Had to put a hefty bloody deposit down though... Funny thing on the D-Lux 4...when I returned the EP2 kit, I picked one up on impulse. Don't own a (relative) zoom compact. I am going to go try it out today for snaps at the various New Year festivals here in LA today. Leica Retail Rep mentioned to me that starting 2010 (today!), D-Lux 4's are going to retail $100 more than present - so $799. That always gets me...he probably knew that However, this price is dangerously close to the GF1 kit ($899 retail). Anyway, wonder if price increases are going to be across the board on current Leica inventory. Happy New Year everyone...now time to get off this board and go shoot...maybe I will take a Minilux MB Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
msbel Posted January 1, 2010 Share #33 Posted January 1, 2010 I meant jpmac!! Sorry about that.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackart Posted January 5, 2010 Author Share #34 Posted January 5, 2010 I have been shot now many days with F1,7 pancake / GF1 combo. And I am very pleased. IQ is just over my expectations. Image shot in RAW and converted to JPEG in LR2: GF1 Image Quality shot at full aperture F1,7 and 1/100 sec try to look at max size (probably have to log into Flickr). Main differences from D-Lux 4 / LX3 1. shutter is much noisier (focal plane) 2. focusing is very fast 3. its much bigger, still pocketable unlike DSLR 5. Shooting RAW is fast, practically as fast as JPG in D-Lux 4 / LX3, I shoot now RAW only. 6. Low light quality is just so much better Jaak Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GFONG Posted January 5, 2010 Share #35 Posted January 5, 2010 I think it is not related to functionality. It is related to Leica's magic. Sometimes what we did is illogicial. It is like to decide buying DLux 4 or Pana LX3. A lot of people paying double to get DLux4. "My head says no. My heart says go." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
h00ligan Posted January 5, 2010 Share #36 Posted January 5, 2010 Jaak, that is very good - it's images like this that stop me ruling out the gf1.. it seems to be better than one would think based on specs and price. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.