Howard posted some test pixesv
using M lens on G1 - search the LUG archive for more
phx
On Fri, 9 Jan 2009 16:30:54 +0100
pwerner
wrote:
>
> 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-com
>
parison-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]
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
http://www.lrflex.furnfeather.net/
Archives are at:
//www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
