Panasonic GF and M-Lenses

[DFV]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have read several times here that some would consider and have a GF for use with M-Lenses. Manly as a backup for an M9...

 

I wonder if anybody uses a GF with together with an M-Lens how do they focus? Has anybody had some experience with this combination?

 

P.s. Please relocate this thread if it is not in the right place.

[250swb]

I use M lenses with the G1, so not the GF, but its essentially the same under the skin except the EVF is built in.

 

The EVF in the G1 is very, very good at focusing manually. The image pops into focus really sharply and it leaves little or no doubt. Its the same if just using the LCD, Panasonic have really cracked manual focus. The implementation is better than on Olympus m4/3 as well, so when using the zoom function (which isn't really necessary most of the time) it goes back to standard view with a touch on the shutter release. On Olympus you need to press the OK button and its clumsy. Of course you are creating a 2x crop factor by mounting an M lens, but the lens inherent qualities do remain in the images, and for once you get a 100% exact framed view of the coverage area, which is a novelty in itself!

 

Steve

[lars_bergquist]

The EVF of the GF-1 seems to be barely usable.

 

The old man from the Age of the Matte Screen

[elgenper]

I have read several times here that some would consider and have a GF for use with M-Lenses. Manly as a backup for an M9...

 

I wonder if anybody uses a GF with together with an M-Lens how do they focus? Has anybody had some experience with this combination?

 

P.s. Please relocate this thread if it is not in the right place.

 

The G1 (now GH1) has a far better EVF than the GF1, but it´s still a "telly screen" you´re looking at... Focussing an M lens (or any manual one) is quite accurate, but rather fiddly; forget action shooting....

 

Also, there´s a "crop factor" of 2 compared to the FF M9, so a 50 mm lens gives the field of view of a 100 mm one.

 

So, it is VERY different (and very inferior) to an M Leica; I wouldn´t even call it a backup. BUT: you can use long lenses on it, and it works great for closeups. I´ll be using mine as a substitute for getting a Visoflex for the M9, never for any shots I could do with the M9 itself.

[Ario Arioldi]

I agree that the EVF of GF1is not a good performer, compared with the one integrated in G1, but still it is usable for manual focussing without any major issue.

The external EVF provided with the Olympus Pen EP2 is in my opinion the best at the moment, and I can precisely focus even w/o using magnification; in addition the sensor based image stabilizer is really a plus when using M lenses 50mm and above in low light.

I had G1 in the past and I'm now using both GF1 and EP2.

Cheers,

Ario

[Samir Jahjah]

I use M lenses with the G1, so not the GF, but its essentially the same under the skin except the EVF is built in.

 

The EVF in the G1 is very, very good at focusing manually. The image pops into focus really sharply and it leaves little or no doubt. Its the same if just using the LCD, Panasonic have really cracked manual focus. The implementation is better than on Olympus m4/3 as well, so when using the zoom function (which isn't really necessary most of the time) it goes back to standard view with a touch on the shutter release. On Olympus you need to press the OK button and its clumsy. Of course you are creating a 2x crop factor by mounting an M lens, but the lens inherent qualities do remain in the images, and for once you get a 100% exact framed view of the coverage area, which is a novelty in itself!

 

Steve

 

I totally agree with this assessment, and for your consideration a few examples with the G1 and a Leica 90mm elmarit (#1) and the Leica 18mm (#2 and 3).

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I know it is a web conversion etc. etc. but these shots, although well executed ( we all know that Samir know how to take a photograph), do in no way show that they were made with Leica M lenses. It does not even inspire me to get such a camera as a backup. For instance look at that foliage in the righthand lower corner of the last shot. that is not bokeh, that is mush. It seems to do the same thing as my Digilux3 does, albeit less pronounced: it chews up foliage in dense bushes and trees and renders it like an oil painting.

[marknorton]

I was one of those who got all in a lather about putting M lenses on a G1, my particular bug-bear being the focussing problems of fast lenses on an M camera unless both the camera and the lens are "just so". In the end though, you reach the conclusion the crop factor of 2.0 is just too much and having to use a WATE to achieve moderate wide-angle shots seems silly.

 

That said, I think the G1 (and now I'd be more inclinded to buy the GF version) is quite a competent P&S camera and there are times when I use it in preference to an M or my big Nikons. I much prefer to use it compared to a Digilux 2, for example.

[Herb Sennet]

For some experience with M-lenses on the GF-1 look here:

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/digital-forum/103493-new-poor-mans-leica.html

 

Focussing the GF-1 on the live view screen with the possibility of zooming in works perfect.

But only while using your camera on a tripod. For shooting handheld you will definitely miss your M9.

 

The GF-1 needs a very good electronic viewfinder, not the one that is presently available.

 

I use a Zeiss Biogon 25 mm also to good effect. However due to the crop factor of 2x most of the M-Lenses will become a lot less attractive on a GF-1 regarding focal length.

 

And real wide angles could give issues with vignetting, color shifts towards the edges and even Maze artifacts depending on the RAW converter.

 

Remember that the wide angle lenses that Panasonic supplies for the GF-1 are software corrected in the camera to give acceptable results.

 

Cheers,

Herb

[Samir Jahjah]

I know it is a web conversion etc. etc. but these shots, although well executed ( we all know that Samir know how to take a photograph), do in no way show that they were made with Leica M lenses. It does not even inspire me to get such a camera as a backup. For instance look at that foliage in the righthand lower corner of the last shot. that is not bokeh, that is mush. It seems to do the same thing as my Digilux3 does, albeit less pronounced: it chews up foliage in dense bushes and trees and renders it like an oil painting.

 

True that the corners are soft when the G1 is used with M-lenses...much more so than when used with Panasonic own Lumix lenses. I don't know why this is the case, and it does not matter whether you use an 18mm or a 50mm. That being said, I always have the G1 in my back with my Leica 90mm for the rare instance when I need a telephoto...but I guess you could achieve the same results, with better quality, with the 90 on the M9 and cropping.

[jaapv]

I must confess that I am in the luxurious position of having an M8 as backup...

[thirdwheel]

I have read several times here that some would consider and have a GF for use with M-Lenses. Manly as a backup for an M9...

 

I wonder if anybody uses a GF with together with an M-Lens how do they focus? Has anybody had some experience with this combination?

 

P.s. Please relocate this thread if it is not in the right place.

 

I have the G1 and have used leica lenses on it. However, it does not do it for me.

[FrankA]

G1 with the 90 cron asph. May be mush on m lenses wider than 35mm but works wonders on longer focal lengths. This is hard to see online. The 11x17 printout is stunning. Frank

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[SoarFM]

I have the G1 and have used leica lenses on it. However, it does not do it for me.

 

I have the GF1. I love the camera and it works particularly well with the 20mm f1.7. I also bought a Novoflex adapter so that I could use my 35 cron and 50 cron as well, they had been gathering dust with my M6. Focusing is easy. I bought the GF1 really as a higher end point and shoot. The M lenses work well, but of course the 4/3 sensor simply has its limits even with the best glass attached.

 

Quite unexpected, the M lenses on my GF1, the wonderful feel, and the many happy memories of use with my M6 prompted me to order an M9.

 

Learning to be patient...

[howard_cummer]

I have been using M lenses on my G1 for the past year. Please see:

 

Using M lenses on the Micro 4/3rds

 

for examples if you are interested. Works well in my experience.

[250swb]

I know it is a web conversion etc. etc. but these shots, although well executed ( we all know that Samir know how to take a photograph), do in no way show that they were made with Leica M lenses. It does not even inspire me to get such a camera as a backup. For instance look at that foliage in the righthand lower corner of the last shot. that is not bokeh, that is mush. It seems to do the same thing as my Digilux3 does, albeit less pronounced: it chews up foliage in dense bushes and trees and renders it like an oil painting.

 

I thought we all knew that the problem with putting wide lenses on a m4/3 camera is that the sensor is designed for telecentric lenses, so the light path isn't hitting the sensor square on as it should when anything wider than a 35mm is used. The bokeh and other qualities of a Leica M lens isn't affected at all for 35mm and upwards. Whatever the Digilux 3 does is something entirely different.

 

Steve

[jaapv]

That has nothing to do with it. I was talking about the way that type of sensor renders - I use the Digilux3 with telecentric lenses exclusively, so that part is out of the equation.

[250swb]

That has nothing to do with it. I was talking about the way that type of sensor renders - I use the Digilux3 with telecentric lenses exclusively, so that part is out of the equation.

 

Well in that case you should try some Olympus lenses which will not turn corners to mush, you may find in this context they are 'better' than Leica, and just as sharp.

 

Steve

[jaapv]

I said nothing about the corners. It is dense foliage everywhere in the image. It does it with the Leica kit zoom too.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[250swb]

I said nothing about the corners. It is dense foliage everywhere in the image. It does it with the Leica kit zoom too.

 

Sorry Jaap, I'm getting so used to people misquoting me that I'm starting to do it now!

 

Steve