[LRflex] New Year and new camera
- From: pwerner <pwerner@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 16:41:08 +0100
Here is a link to Sean Reid's review of the G1 (paying site)
http://www.reidreviews.com/reidreviews/flash.asp
I ordered the G1 yesterday and am really looking forward to using all of my
Leica glass
(M+R) ib ut
P?eter
----------------original message-----------------
De: "pwerner"
A: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 16:30:54 +0100
----------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>Do not forget to look at the Panasonic G1, it is not a SLR in the strict
term of the word, It
>can use both Leica M and R glass. There are heated discussions going on in
other fora, sush as
>the Leica Camera forum
>http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m8-forum/73949-dreaded-co
>mparison-thread-g1-m8-2-a.html. Whoever bought one seems enthusiastic and
reviews are generally very positive.
>
>Best,
>Peter
>
>
>----------------original message-----------------
>De: "David Young" dsy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>A: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2009 09:10:17 -0800
>----------------------------------------------------------
>
>>
>>At 27/12/2008, you wrote:
>>
>>Happy Holidays and Happy New Year to all!
>>
>>I have been reading a lot of posts regarding digital alternatives on this
list, and
>>since I don't want to hold my breath any longer for a dR10 or what have
you, I am considering the
>>adaptive road. This is where the new camera comes in. Now I don't have
much experience in the
>>digital domain since its inception. I had a Minolta 7 and now a Canon
A570is (hardly hard core
>>digital equipment).
>>
>>The thing is I cannot seem to get away from Leica glass whether it's M or
R. I do also use my
>>Contax or Nikon AF system once in a while (depending on event or use). But
it's the glass that
>>has kept me with Leica this long with film. Now, I have read people on
this list use
>>Olympus/Panasonic 4/3 system or the Canon system. All the photos look
great, but I would probably be able
>>to live with a 1.6x factor compared to a 2.0x factor. I only, for a
moment, thought about
>>the M8, but I seem to like the SLR more so than the rangefinder (though it
depends on the
>>event or use again).
>>
>>I would think some of you would have tried the available routes to get to
where you're at
>>now, so I just want to draw on a little bit on your experiences. My
starter route is the Canon
>>XSi. I don't think the screen is user exchangeable as with the more pro
like models. Was this
>>a deal breaker for your decision to settle on the system/rig you now use?
Is it difficult
>>to focus without a split screen? The Catz Eye screen seems to be
recommended by most
>>folks.
>>
>>David, you seem to be set on your Olympus E3 system and Doug has been
using a DMR for his
>>wildlife photos. It seems the stop down metering caused you to either go
dedicated digital with
>>another system or to succumb to a digital R body. I take it there's no in
between for you?
>>
>>Sorry for the long post after lurking all this time.
>>
>>Take care all,
>>Gary E
>>
>>Good Morning, Gary, et al.
>>
>>Sorry to be so long in chiming in to this conversation, but we have been a
way, for a
>>holiday, family "rebellion", skiing in the Canadian Rockies. Got back last
night and now
>>wading my way through hundreds of emails.
>>
>>My thoughts on your dilemma?
>>
>>1) The R8 or R9 with DMR is, I'm sure, the nicest combination. Until it
failed, and Leica
>>was unable to replace it (a long story), it was the best image cutter I'd
ever used. I don't
>>think Doug will argue that point.
>>
>>2) Prior to owning the DMR, I'd owned a Canon 20D. Afterwards, it was the
30D. Although
>>the Leica glass performed, as always, I was never happy with the images
captured by the
>>Canons. They never seemed to have the fine detail which I got out of the
DMR. They suffered the
>>mentioned exposure problem, with stop down metering and did not balance
well, in my hand, though
>>I admit, the lighter bodies were nice!
>>
>>3) I was in a store, about to buy a couple of AF lenses for the 30D, when
I tried the E3, and
>>within 30 minutes, walked out with it, 2 lenses and a 2.4 converter,
instead. I couldn't be
>>happier.
>>
>>First of all, the Leica lenses and E3 play well together. Stop down
metering works as
>>you'd expect.
>>
>>Secondly, the in-body stabilization works very well, and makes my older,
Leica
>>lenses IS lenses!
>>
>>Third, the finder is the closest thing to the R8's finder I've seen ...
brighter and
>>crisper than the 20D & 30D finders. Very easy and very accurate for manual
focusing...
>>something which cannot be said for the 20 & 30D Canons.
>>
>>Fourth, the body seems, for me, to be "right", and balances well with the
Telyt
>>400/6.8. (With the IS, it can be hand held, in a pinch, and work very
well! - see: [
>>http://www.furnfeather.net/Temps/Whitetail.htm)
>>
>>Fifth: Some people complain about the myriad of buttons on the E3, and
when I first saw
>>it, I agreed. But I must admit, I find them well enough laid out that it
is very rare to
>>accidentally change a setting (a common problem with the R8) and yet the
access to the most used
>>features is much faster than through Canon's menu system.
>>
>>Lastly, the investment is substantially lower. My E3, with two lenses
(both very
>>good, I might add) and the 1.4x converter cost about half what I paid for
the R8+DMR.
>>
>>So much for the advantages. Now the drawbacks.
>>
>>You mention that you might be able to handle a 1.6 crop factor, but not
the 2.0 crop
>>factor. That's up to you. If you shoot a lot of w/a, then the 2x factor is
a problem. Your 21mm SA
>>becomes a 42 (almost "normal") lens. I solved this problem first with
Canon's 10~22 mm lens (a
>>very nice optic) and later with the Olympus 12~60 zoom, which equates to
the FOV of a 24mm
>>lens ... wide enough for me.
>>
>>OTOH, if you shoot long, as I do, the 2x factor is a huge advantage. When
I shot with the
>>DMR, I regularly used the 2x converter with the 400 Telyt, when shooting
small birds. This
>>meant, a max f-stop of 13.6, wide open! With the 2x advantage, I can shoot
with nearly the same
>>FOV, without the converter, and at f6.8. Not an insubstantial difference,
in low light! In
>>a pinch, I add the OLY 1.4 converter, behind the Telyt, and the
combination works better
>>than the much older, non-APO, Leica converter & Telyt.
>>
>>Noise, at low ISOs is indistinguishable between the DMR/Canon/Oly e3
bodies. But, at
>>ISOs higher than 640, noise is a bit higher than with the Canons, but
equal to, or slightly
>>better, than the DMR - depending on the exact ISO. As I come from the film
era, where higher ISOs
>>meant "grain", I can live with the noise, which is, at every ISO, less
than the grain of
>>equivalent films. Besides, heavy noise suppression also blurs the fine
detail ... for me, a
>>problem with the Canons. More importantly, because I can shoot at an
effectively wider
>>aperture, I can use a lower ISO!
>>
>>My conclusions?
>>
>>As I am not a rich man and given the meteoric drop in value of all digital
products
>>(compared to their film equivalents), it is unlikely that I will ever
invest in a new, Leica,
>>digital product again. (I say this, not having seen the 9.2 Diesel.) But,
if a 14mp, Oly E4 were
>>to appear on the market, tomorrow, I'd buy one so fast, it would make your
head spin!
>>
>>Oh, yes... one last point. Last February, I dropped my 80~200/4 Vario on
the ice, and
>>sent it for repair. It was returned late, last October. In August, I
suffered a stone chip in
>>the middle of the front element of my 12~60mm Oly zoom. I sent it to
Oly-Toronto, and it was
>>back in my hands, 8 days later, including shipping, both ways. Turnaround,
at Oly, was
>>
>>
>>David Young,
>>
>>Logan Lake, CANADA
>>
>>
>>Limited Edition Prints at: www.furnfeather.net
>>
>>Personal Web-site at: www.main.furnfeather.net ->
>>http://www.furnfeather.net/Temps/Whitetail.htm]
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
Other related posts:
