or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Fine Living, Home, Design & Auto › Micro 4/3 cameras: Discussion/Recommendation
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Micro 4/3 cameras: Discussion/Recommendation - Page 2

post #16 of 27
some good articles, reviews:

michael reichmann on the gh2
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/re...rst_look.shtml

kirk tuck on the e-pl2
http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com...ent-kirks.html

dante stella on the nex5
http://dantestella.com/technical/nex.html

thom hogan on a bunch of stuff
http://bythom.com/compactmirrorless.htm

i'm waiting to see if the x100 has good af in low light. the chances of there being another camera like it (built-in optical viewfinder, fixed 35/2 prime) are extremely low.
post #17 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragon View Post
Like others have pointed out, I think the weak point of the GF-1 is in the stabilization. There is no stabilization in the camera, so night shots are a challenge. I have been getting around this by setting the camera on something nearby (using as a stand), but it would be nice to be able to take more stable shots holding the camera in my hand.

Can you put this in a bit of context? How much does it matter? I use a stable surface to take any shot with my P&S so that idea doesn't bother me. However, you are saying that the camera is fine for daytime shots if you just hold it but at night time, it does not work as well? Is it doable while holding but you prefer a solid surface?
Did you consider the EP1 at all?
post #18 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by fashion_newbie View Post
Can you put this in a bit of context? How much does it matter? I use a stable surface to take any shot with my P&S so that idea doesn't bother me. However, you are saying that the camera is fine for daytime shots if you just hold it but at night time, it does not work as well? Is it doable while holding but you prefer a solid surface? Did you consider the EP1 at all?
less light, more exposure. longer shutter speeds allows more blur from camera shake. a lot of these cameras don't have eye-level viewfinders, so you're forced to hold the camera in front of you, a position that is much less stable than holding it against your face. the main advantage of built-in image stabilization is that it also works for smaller, faster prime lenses. that's why a lot of people are using the panasonic 20/1.7 on olympus pens.
post #19 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by aizan View Post
less light, more exposure. longer shutter speeds allows more blur from camera shake. a lot of these cameras don't have eye-level viewfinders, so you're forced to hold the camera in front of you, a position that is much less stable than holding it against your face.

Got it, thanks. Leaning towards a GF1.
This is a silly question but - I understand that the GF1 does not have built in stabilization. Instead, it is in the lens. The kit comes with a lens. Therefore, wouldn't you always be using some sort of a lens? Or does one use the camera without any lens?

Seems the only time you would have an issue is if you are using the camera with a lens not built for the 4/3's. Is that a fair conclusion?
post #20 of 27
Not all lenses are stabilized. For example, the 20mm pancake is not. Stabilization is less important for wide angle lenses than for zooms - you'll see the rule of thumb mentioned at 1/focal length for minimum shutter speed for a given focal length. IOW, the average person could hand hold the 20mm for 1/40 of a second (2x crop factor on M4/3), whereas on the long end of the 45-200 you'd be limited to around 1/400 of a second.

Of course the 20mm is also a very fast lens (f1.7), which allows you to shoot faster speeds when wide open.
post #21 of 27
There are some lenses that don't have built-in stabilization, so IBIS is good for that. Also, you can make lenses smaller and lighter when they don't have to carry a stabilizer. The disadvantage is that you have one stabilizer that has to work with all lenses, and it cannot stabilize as well as one built into a lens. Also, it's a fairly popular thing to adapt older lenses from other systems to micro 4/3s because the optics of the micro 4/3s make this actually very easy. An IBIS would help here, since those old lenses don't have an IS system. --Andre
post #22 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by A Y View Post
...
Got it. This is basically what I understood but better explained. The reviews did mention that the GF lenses are larger as a result of including the stabilizer. So, do you always need a lens attached or can you shoot without a lens on some very basic level?
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcg View Post
Not all lenses are stabilized. For example, the 20mm pancake is not. Stabilization is less important for wide angle lenses than for zooms
I understand the first part. I have never used lenses so still trying to understand the idea.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcg View Post
IOW, the average person could hand hold the 20mm for 1/40 of a second (2x crop factor on M4/3), whereas on the long end of the 45-200 you'd be limited to around 1/400 of a second. Of course the 20mm is also a very fast lens (f1.7), which allows you to shoot faster speeds when wide open.
Could you please expand on the first part of this? Between the kit lenses, I'd go for the 20mm. I will be using this as a travel camera, taking pictures on vacations and general snapshots. Edit: It also seems like the EP1 is a fair bit cheaper on the bay than GF1. Is this always the best source to pick up a cheap one?
post #23 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by fashion_newbie View Post
So, do you always need a lens attached or can you shoot without a lens on some very basic level?
You need a lens of some sort attached unless you enjoy looking at mostly white rectangles. Actually, I'm not sure these cameras would allow you to take an actual picture without a lens attached. On hand-holding, in general, 1/(lens focal length in equivalent 35 mm sensor size) is the minimum speed you can hand hold a lens without visible shake. It's actually more complicated than that, especially with the high-res sensors on today's cameras, but it's a good rule of thumb. --Andre
post #24 of 27
Better explanation than I could write:

http://www.photographybay.com/2010/0...shutter-speed/
post #25 of 27
Thread Starter 
After deliberation, I think I'm going to try to find a decent deal on an Olympus E-P2. Hopefully the price will drop soon, since the EPL2 has been released. Looking forward to playing with legacy glass and my dad's old lenses. According to rumor, Oly and Panasonic will release more "professional" higher-spec versions of the Pen Series and GF sometime this year --- might be something to wait for?
post #26 of 27
I have the Olympus E-P2

Terrific camera. I like it a lot.

I really like the on-board image stabilization. I use it with my legacy Canon FD lenses, and get image stabilization while using my old Canon glass.

More on my blog here:

http://www.larsonweb.com/photography/id7.html
post #27 of 27
Of course...the grand-daddy m4/3 forum of all time... And this is just awesome: http://www.flickr.com/photos/nokton/3952529944/ And I know this was fooled around, but I find it amazing that a consumer digicam can do this
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Fine Living, Home, Design & Auto › Micro 4/3 cameras: Discussion/Recommendation