EP-2 vs M8 as budget, spare or 2nd camera

[Jerry_R]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm now going to support the M8, which, with filters will produce excellent images with an acuity and crispness that can't be got from any camera with an AA filter.

If you want to have camera without AA - select G1, GF1, GH1. Their AA filter is very weak, what was proved by DP Review. Its REAL resolution was compared to Canon 5D II. So I doubt LUMIX (with its poor AA) + 20mm won't give bigger resolution than M8.

 

Why is it necessary to slag off either of them? the Pen is very versatile - a lovely camera, both the M8 and the X1 have their advantages too. IMHO the choice between the 3 would be much more to do with functionality and practicality and ergonomics than IQ.

Absolutely agree, but no-one will tell me that M8 is BETTER than u43. Sorry. I saw to much of both.

 

More to read about u43 and PEN itself.

 

EP1 vs Leica M8 picture resolution

EP1 vs Leica M8 picture resolution - The GetDPI Photography Forums

 

Craig Mod - 16 days in Himalayas

Panasonic Lumix GF1 Field Test — 16 Days in the Himalayas

Panasonic Lumix GF1 Field Test — Video Samples from the Himalayas

 

Jim Radcliffe - My Photography with the Panasonic GF1

Panasonic GF1 Photography by Jim Radcliffe

 

Tyson Robichaud Photo-blography - Panasonic GF-1, my new obsession

Panasonic GF-1, my new obsession. � Tyson Robichaud Photo-blography

 

 

and Leica Man about u43:

 

STEVE HUFF - E-P1

THE OLYMPUS E-P1 DIGITAL “PEN” REVIEW

 

STEVE HUFF - E-P2

The Olympus E-P2 Digital Camera Review | STEVE HUFF PHOTOS

 

STEVE HUFF - GF1

THE PANASONIC LUMIX GF1 DIGITAL CAMERA REVIEW

 

STEVE HUFF - 20mm lens

The Pansonic Lumix G 20 1.7 Lens Review | STEVE HUFF PHOTOS

 

 

PS: you do not need to buy LEICA lenses to achieve best results with u43. In fact: you won't beat that set with LEICA glass so far:

- 7-14mm

- 20mm

- 45mm

 

OK, maybe except last lens ;-)

[Logic108]

Just to say that Steve Huff prefers the X1 over the Pen plus panny 20mm pancake.

This is not to take anything away from these cameras just that I'm looking for the 'wow' and this is what Leica cameras give me.

[haroldp]

If you want to use leica lenses, the M8 makes much more sense than a micro 4/3. Ease of mounting and focussing is a big difference.

 

Remember also that the 4/3 sensor is less than half the size of the M8 sensor (2X as compared to 1.33 X), which means that for wide angles you will need very short focal length leica lenses which is where you are most likely to have correction issues due to light angles of attack on the sensor.

 

Regards .... H

[brianv]

The Nikon S3 is the perfect 2nd camera to a Nikon SP.

 

The Leica M2 is the perfect 2nd camera to a Leica M3.

 

For Canon, a Pair of Canon P's is the way to go. A Canon 7 with Canon P just does not feel right. (I also use a Canon EF with a Canon F1, but not as good)

 

The handling of the cameras makes it 2nd nature to use these combinations as a pair.

 

I suspect that the only camera that would be better than a Leica M8 as a 2nd camera to an M9 is a second M9.

 

Resolution, weak-AA, low-noise, and other high-tech gadgetry does not mean a thing if trying to adjust to using the "pair" of cameras slows you down in getting the shot. If you are comfortable using 4-3 system cameras, get a pair of them. If you want a Leica RF system, get an M3 and an M9 and have the best of both worlds I'll be charitable and let you select an MP instead of the M3.

 

If you HAVE to have all-digital, get an M8+M9 or M9+M9.

[brill64]

if you're going to use your back up in conjunction with m lenses and your m8, remember to take off the uv/ir filters as you swap lenses or you will get a weird colour cast..

[Guest Bernd Banken]

Since two weeks the PEN 1 and 2 (with EVF) are in my bag. What a surprise and comfortable shooting out in the streets.

My duffelcoat's pocket is a warm shelter and the pancake suits this 35mm wide angle view which I like so much.

Now I understand why people are so excited about this little box.

 

Together with my shabby 50mm Cron PLUS the image stabilizer it is a nice telelens camera. So does the little Tele-Elmarit 90mm......

 

When I should select a camera for a faraway island with power supply, the M8 would rest on the shelf and the Oly will make the trip, because Solms is too far away.....

 

First day, third photograph with the EP-1 and the PENcake 17mm:

 

The Wurlitzer on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

 

Bernd

[brianv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I keep a hot mirror filter on my Full-Frame Nikon DSLR, on a 60/2.8 Micro-Nikkor. I've never had a strange color cast. What problems does it cause with an M9? Is this a focal length dependent problem? The filter might be redundant, but what is the color cast problem? I've been using them with first-generation DSLR's since 1993.

[haroldp]

.

 

The Leica M2 is the perfect 2nd camera to a Leica M3.

 

 

The Leica M3 is the perfect 2nd camera to a Leica M2.

 

Regards ... Harold

[Jerry_R]

If you want to use leica lenses, the M8 makes much more sense than a micro 4/3.

As me and others said - u43 is most efficient with u43 lenses. If your purpose is to use LEICA lenses - than M8 is better choice. But do not expect better results than from u43 with its best lenses.

 

Remember also that the 4/3 sensor is less than half the size of the M8 sensor (2X as compared to 1.33 X)

Yeah... And sky is red... Have a nice reading:

wrotniak.net: Four Thirds Sensor Size and Aspect Ratio

For wide angles - GH1 also has multiaspect sensor, which gives resolution 4 352 x 2 448 in 16:9.

High ISO is managed in u43, despite of smaller (but not twice) sensor.

If interested in quality of GH1 sensor, can read here: DxOMark review for the Panasonic Lumix DMC GH1

This sensor is to be used in coming new generation of u43 bodies.

 

for wide angles you will need very short focal length leica lenses which is where you are most likely to have correction issues due to light angles of attack on the sensor.

There is no solution with Leica lenses for u43 for wide. LUMIX 7-14mm lens is solution for someone who wants to get best of u43. Also focusing distance is 25cm. You can forget about it with LEICA so far. Samples for ones interested:

G1_7-14_light monopod or tripod, recent pics : Micro Four Thirds Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

GF1 shots/7-14 & others in snowy Brooklyn: Micro Four Thirds Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

GH1 7-14 mm shoots Skateboarding: Micro Four Thirds Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

G1 and 7-14 meets the British Winter: Micro Four Thirds Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

Panasonic 7-14: Micro Four Thirds Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

[Ivo_Afrikanac]

In my experience you can use M lenses on EP-2 or any other m4/3 camera with decent to good results only starting from 50mm and above (100mm and above in 24x36mm terms).

If you need wide angle lenses you have to use the dedicated ones (telecentric design).

This is one of the main reasons why a m4/3 is not a replacement for a digital M (IMHO).

Cheers,

Ario

 

That is really good point. Thanks.

[Ivo_Afrikanac]

I fully agree. It will give you better IQ, including nicer JPG colors, sharpness and high ISO than M8. Especially with 20mm lens, also 7-14mm and 45mm are very good. Focusing distance is much more closer. You can observe on line AF and framing - no guessing, front focus, back focus.

 

Only and just M9 - makes the deal, makes the difference.

 

Do not listen closed people, who only belive in Leica and do not see external world.

 

If you listen people who had both in their hands - PEN will give much more better IQ in most (not all) situations. M8 is a test phase product, sth released in half of the way before FF. Forget need of IR filters, poorer resolution, poorer JPG results and many others.

 

I also considered this way. When I saw results from M8 of my firend - I would never buy it, even for half of price.

 

I decided to buy M9. And I know all existing bodies and lenses from u43 very good.

 

PS: you should ask the same question on non Leica portal - you will receive more real answers. Here you can get very, very often close minded answers, like advices of using Leica lenses, even if corresponding Zeiss is better - most often from people who use Leica for years, and never had Zeiss lens attached...

 

Thanks for the depth. I am Olympus user, so somehow that part of the story is covered... I wanted die-hard Leica fans opinion... and to stir it up a bit as well.

[Ivo_Afrikanac]

Jonoslack:

1. I can say with confidence that the IQ from the M8 is better than the Pen.

2. I can say with confidence that the IQ from the X1 is better than the Pen with a Leica lens mounted.

3. I cannot say with confidence that the X1's IQ is that much better then the Pen's if a dedicated lens is used on the Pen i.e 20mm pancake lens.

4. The original poster is asking about mounting Leica lenses on the Pen and would the Pen's IQ be the equal of the M8 if mounted with the same Leica lens. The answer is that no the IQ would not be a match given the same lens used. There are problems with using Leica lenses on the Pen.

5. Unfortunately at the moment there is no cheap alternative if you want an interchangeable lens RF system. The cheapest option is a second-hand M8. Obviously the X1 has no interchangeable lens and so probably does not fit the needs of the OP in any case.

 

Very valuable points. Thanks.

 

My mind is actually made up. I will get M9 when I get the chance, same goes for M lense(s). EP-2 would ba a side kick purchase if M9 gets prolonged.

Money is always an issue, I will not compromise on final solution.

[Ivo_Afrikanac]

HI Jerry

Having supported the Pen against the X1, I'm now going to support the M8, which, with filters will produce excellent images with an acuity and crispness that can't be got from any camera with an AA filter.

 

Why is it necessary to slag off either of them? the Pen is very versatile - a lovely camera, both the M8 and the X1 have their advantages too. IMHO the choice between the 3 would be much more to do with functionality and practicality and ergonomics than IQ.

 

... and personal bias (mine at least), as always, we could split hairs on this forever.

[haroldp]

As me and others said - u43 is most efficient with u43 lenses. If your purpose is to use LEICA lenses - than M8 is better choice. But do not expect better results than from u43 with its best lenses.

 

 

Yeah... And sky is red... Have a nice reading:

wrotniak.net: Four Thirds Sensor Size and Aspect Ratio

For wide angles - GH1 also has multiaspect sensor, which gives resolution 4 352 x 2 448 in 16:9.

High ISO is managed in u43, despite of smaller (but not twice) sensor.

If interested in quality of GH1 sensor, can read here: DxOMark review for the Panasonic Lumix DMC GH1

This sensor is to be used in coming new generation of u43 bodies.

 

 

There is no solution with Leica lenses for u43 for wide. LUMIX 7-14mm lens is solution for someone who wants to get best of u43. Also focusing distance is 25cm. You can forget about it with LEICA so far. Samples for ones interested:

G1_7-14_light monopod or tripod, recent pics : Micro Four Thirds Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

GF1 shots/7-14 & others in snowy Brooklyn: Micro Four Thirds Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

GH1 7-14 mm shoots Skateboarding: Micro Four Thirds Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

G1 and 7-14 meets the British Winter: Micro Four Thirds Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

Panasonic 7-14: Micro Four Thirds Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

 

My entire point is that for use with Leica lenses, as a backup for a Leica, as was originally asked, Leica cameras make the most sense. 4/3 cameras should be used with 4/3 lenses.

 

While I have no experience with micro 4/3, I do use an Olympus E-3 occasionally with Olympus lenses, and they are excellent.

 

There is however no comparison for total IQ between the E-3, and either Leica M9, or Nikon D3x with the best glass available for each. I do consider the M9, and D3x to be comparable to each other in total IQ, but with a different 'look'.

 

As technologies equalize over time, size matters.

 

Red skies make stunning photo's

 

Regards ... Harold

[Ivo_Afrikanac]

If you want to use leica lenses, the M8 makes much more sense than a micro 4/3. Ease of mounting and focussing is a big difference.

 

Remember also that the 4/3 sensor is less than half the size of the M8 sensor (2X as compared to 1.33 X), which means that for wide angles you will need very short focal length leica lenses which is where you are most likely to have correction issues due to light angles of attack on the sensor.

 

Regards .... H

 

I think u43 sensor is only marginally smaller then M8 APS format?

[Ivo_Afrikanac]

Isn't one aspect of a budget backup camera that would make it useful, as opposed to being left in the drawer, is that it could do some things the main camera can't, fill in the gaps so to speak? The M8 doesn't add anything in this respect, its the same as the M9 in essence, but with a crop factor and filters to take off and put on again when changing from one to the other.

 

The IQ of the Olympus, or Panasonic, isn't bad, it does nice colours, the resolution is excellent with Leica (35mm up) or the kit lenses, and it has extra tricks that the M9 can't hope to match. Like video, like image stabilisation even with your Leica lens mounted, like the ability to use a 45-200mm lens (90-400 equivalent), like ability for doing macro, etc. All these things are what the M9 can't do effectively, so why double up the ineffectiveness of that by buying an M8?

 

The EP-2 isn't an M9 and could never compete for ultimate IQ, but neither should it be the butt of eliteist sneering because ultimate IQ isn't much good if you don't have the varied tools to do the job.

 

Steve

 

My thinking also...

[diogenis]

As me and others said - u43 is most efficient with u43 lenses. If your purpose is to use LEICA lenses - than M8 is better choice. But do not expect better results than from u43 with its best lenses.

Obviously, you must be joking... oh and Nasa never went to the moon, the whole thing is proven: it was staged:cool:

btw, if what you say is true, then X1 IQ is way better than D3s's. Isn't that a marvel?

[250swb]

As me and others said - u43 is most efficient with u43 lenses. If your purpose is to use LEICA lenses - than M8 is better choice. But do not expect better results than from u43 with its best lenses.

 

I think thats a fair statement if you are comparing prints up to 12x16. The m4/3 sensors are very good, as are even the kit lenses (!).

 

If the ultimate aim is to make the ultimate image I'm not sure what M8 or M9 users are doing playing with Leica's anyway, they should be using digital medium format or large format film (still). So on the basis that using an M8 or M9 is itself a compromise in IQ it seems a bit rich to suggest anything even lower in the food chain can't bite back and take both a chunk of the market and a chunk out of IQ myths that have developed over the years.

 

I wouldn't feel the need to apologise for any images from my m4/3 camera that were mixed in with others from my M9. No viewer would know under what circumstances they were made, and I don't think they would notice any important difference in IQ for an average print size. If people feel the need to explain an image by refering to the status of the camera or lens, then it probably isn't a very good image anyway.

 

Steve

[Ivo_Afrikanac]

I think thats a fair statement if you are comparing prints up to 12x16. The m4/3 sensors are very good, as are even the kit lenses (!).

 

If the ultimate aim is to make the ultimate image I'm not sure what M8 or M9 users are doing playing with Leica's anyway, they should be using digital medium format or large format film (still). So on the basis that using an M8 or M9 is itself a compromise in IQ it seems a bit rich to suggest anything even lower in the food chain can't bite back and take both a chunk of the market and a chunk out of IQ myths that have developed over the years.

 

I wouldn't feel the need to apologise for any images from my m4/3 camera that were mixed in with others from my M9. No viewer would know under what circumstances they were made, and I don't think they would notice any important difference in IQ for an average print size. If people feel the need to explain an image by refering to the status of the camera or lens, then it probably isn't a very good image anyway.

 

Steve

 

Thank you for that!

Final result is what matters, and if you HAVE to say it was done with Leica to give it some weight, then we are gone from Photo concept and well into Myth concept.

 

I still think M9 is the greatest tool (I realy wish to have one), but should recognize it is a compromise as well, as all things in life.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[haroldp]

I think u43 sensor is only marginally smaller then M8 APS format?

 

The 4/3 sensor is 12.3 X 13mm = 224.9 mm/sq - crop factor 2.0

 

The APS-H sensor as used in the Leica M8 is 27 X 18 mm = 486 mm/sq crop factor 1.33

 

As you can see, the Leica M8 sensor is more than twice the size as measured by either area, or by diagonal (for crop factor).

 

Other common sensor sizes are:

 

The APS-C sensor as used by Canon is 22.5 X 15 mm = 337.5 mm/sq crop factor 1.6

 

The APS-C sensor as used by Nikon is 23.7 X 15.5 mm = 367.35 mm/sq crop factor 1.5

 

The APS-H sensor as used by Canon is 28.7 X 19.1 mm = 548.17 mm/sq crop factor 1.30

 

The FF sensor as used by Nikon is 35.9 X 24 mm = 861.6 mm/sq crop factor 1.0

 

The FF sensor as used by Leica is 36 X 24 mm = 864 mm/sq crop factor 1.0

 

Most Medium Format Digital Sensors are 48 X 36 mm exactly twice the size of FF 35 mm

 

Regards .... Harold