Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Like 0

GX7 Tips

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

SlowSong
SlowSong e2 Member 64470 forum postsSlowSong vcard England29 Constructive Critique Points
25 Aug 2014 - 8:33 PM

Denny, LUV U.
X Wink

Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links 
25 Aug 2014 - 8:33 PM

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

lemmy
lemmy  71896 forum posts United Kingdom
25 Aug 2014 - 9:00 PM


Quote: You certainly don't come across in this forum or your youtube videos as being biased toward anything irrationally

Thanks! I have enough irrationality in my life without cameras Grin

That 300mm, is it likely to be mega-expensive? It shouldn't be too difficult a lens to make because the 300mm f4s for SLRs/ DSLRs are pretty commonplace and not dear.

I had a Nikkor 300 f2.8, lovely lens but it hardly ever came out of the boot of my car. The 300mm f4 was so much smaller and just as sharp and I used it all the time. What I'd like is a 150 or 200 f2.8 with a 1.4X converter.

Coast
Coast Critique Team 61227 forum postsCoast vcard United Kingdom292 Constructive Critique Points
25 Aug 2014 - 9:14 PM

Come on Denny don't keep it to yourself Grin

What was the update from BH in New York?

StrayCat
StrayCat e2 Member 1014851 forum postsStrayCat vcard Canada2 Constructive Critique Points
25 Aug 2014 - 9:59 PM

What BHPhoto said, are you ready for this? The Olympus 300mm f4 lens is still unavailable for shipping.Grin But that's encouraging, don't you think?Wink


Quote: What I'd like is a 150 or 200 f2.8 with a 1.4X converter.

The 150mm f2.8 should be available this year. I'd like a 200mm f2.8 also, it's a very practical focal length for medium to large mammals. When driving in the mountains, which I do a lot of, I wouldn't mind having a 200mm f2.8 on the camera for late evening when the tempurature drops and the large animals like moose, deer, elk, and bears come out of the shade of the forest to feed. It's hit and miss sometimes with the 100-300mm in dim light, but I make do, and I have lots of fairly sharp images at 300mm and 1/60th, resting the lens on a piece of styrofoam pipe insulation split down one side and fitted on top of a partially rolled down car window. I don't use a window mount because it's a nuisance to remove and refit in cold weather. We spot the grizzlies mainly at over 7000 feet, so it's usually cold up there.

Last Modified By StrayCat at 25 Aug 2014 - 9:59 PM
lemmy
lemmy  71896 forum posts United Kingdom
25 Aug 2014 - 10:33 PM


Quote: We spot the grizzlies mainly at over 7000 feet, so it's usually cold up there.


Fascinating! A word of caution, though. If you give a camera to a grizzlie to take pictures, the copyright belongs to the bear.

I don't know how it is negotiating copyright with grizzlies but it might be worth getting an agent to do it for you.

StrayCat
StrayCat e2 Member 1014851 forum postsStrayCat vcard Canada2 Constructive Critique Points
26 Aug 2014 - 2:17 AM

You'd be surprised how many tourists think they can do that.Grin There was a fellow a few years ago stopped to view a grizzly that was grazing on the bank beside the road. He brought a bag of marshmallows from his car and started throwing them to the bear. When the bag was half empty, the fellow closed it up and stuck it in his back pocket, and turned to walk away; the rest was on the evening news.Tongue

mikehit
mikehit  56531 forum posts United Kingdom10 Constructive Critique Points
26 Aug 2014 - 8:43 AM

He obviously hadn't seen the cancellation claws.Blush

lemmy
lemmy  71896 forum posts United Kingdom
26 Aug 2014 - 12:46 PM


Quote: He obviously hadn't seen the cancellation claws

Grin

ChrisV
ChrisV  7800 forum posts United Kingdom26 Constructive Critique Points
26 Aug 2014 - 2:42 PM


Quote:
I did used to shoot quite a bit of video and I might get back into it, makes me wonder if I'd have been better off with an Olympus body.

The Olympus lenses seem to be better than the Panasonic ones and people repeatedly say when they are on an Olympus body they are image-stabilized and that Olympus has the better IS. I realise Olympus has IS built in to many bodies but it's as if they are saying it works even better in tandem with Olympus lenses.

I know the Gx7 has in-body IS but appears not to be sophisticated, however one blog I read thinks it's better than the 5 axis Oly version.

Panasonic's IS doesn't work with video which is when you need it more really as fast shutter speed can't help you as it can with stills.

I wish there were a few more manufacturers doing lenses for m43 or that the current guys did more. Hopefully Sigma will start making more, clearly though they have a far bigger market for glass they make for APS-C cameras.


I don't think there's a blanket 'Olympus primes are better than Panasonic's' rule Chris. The DxO marks have that Pan/Leica 42.5 as top dog for resolution followed by the Oly 75 1.8 - neither of them cheap, but they perhaps both justify their price.

There's very little difference [in fact they get the same score] between the Oly 17 and the Panny 20 - it's just the latter is sluggish to focus in low light and the Olympus is closer to the 35mm equ that finds favour with a lot of people, although of course the 20mm is a fraction faster and will give a smidgeon [also because of its increased focal length] more blur. I have both those lenses but my current favourite of the ones I own is the Pan/Leica Summilux 25/1.4. For some that won't be as useful as a [roughly] 35mm equivalent, but I find it great for shooting small groups and it is very effective at subject isolation and rated third in DxO's benchmarking. I haven't done any scientific tests at all [I really couldn't fuss myself with that sort of thing], I just know I'm happy with what I can get out of it.

I was mulling over buying one for a while then there was a great offer of a GH3 for 750 and one claim later a free grip+extra battery+Summilux 25! Far too much temptation to put in my way...

Chris_L
Chris_L e2 Member 1022 forum postsChris_L vcard United Kingdom
26 Aug 2014 - 3:37 PM

Sorry I'm still brand new to the system and I didn't mean to suggest that Olympus lenses were better. I think my worry came from the fact that I ended up buying Olympus lenses and then I kept reading how they were stabilized when attached to Olympus bodies.

It's as if they are saying that Olympus lenses have some kind of internal IS circuitry (or mechanics even) that's only activated when connected to Olympus bodies. It's a curious thing to point out that the lens is stabilized when attached to a body with IS - wouldn't you be able to say the same about any lens that was attached to a body that itself had IS?

mikehit
mikehit  56531 forum posts United Kingdom10 Constructive Critique Points
26 Aug 2014 - 4:08 PM


Quote: wouldn't you be able to say the same about any lens that was attached to a body that itself had IS?

Yep. In fact putting a stabilised Panasonic lens onto an Oly body will make things worse and you should turn off either the lens IS or IBIS.

The Oly lenses have no IS in them, but that is not to say the lens does not communicate with the IBIS gadgetry to tell it what focal length is being used, in the same way that if you are using legacy non-MFT lenses you hsould enter the focal length manually.

ChrisV
ChrisV  7800 forum posts United Kingdom26 Constructive Critique Points
26 Aug 2014 - 4:22 PM

Olympus do seem to offer a greater range of primes than Panasonic do and some damn good ones at that. I suppose one advantage Olympus lenses have is that without IS in them they can be both lighter and cheaper. As I've said elsewhere though IS is of more limited use when you're talking about short focal lengths anyway.

Having said all that I was absolutely astounded at how effective the IBIS is on the EM1 - I have low-light shots at half a second hand held that are sharp - except for the trees which are showing the effects of a light breeze!

I guess overall the EM1 is the best MFT body I have for IQ, colour and noise handling, but I wish it had the ergonomics and the battery life of the GH3 [not that it's ergonomically poor by a long shot - just personal preference].

Incidentally have you seen the round up of 'enthusiast level' ILCs updated on DPReview? The D7100 gets top marks by 1% [at 85%], but the EM1 is their pick of the bunch even though the IQ is rated at very slightly less. That's because they don't give any score for portability or immeasurables. Sounds like pretty fair comment to me...

The GX7 scores 1% less than the EM5 which tops the mid mirrorless roundup.

As you've found yourself, although they may not be 'better' than APSc DSLRs there really isn't much to make you choose the latter if you're weight/bulk conscious/don't have a big investment or don't need the very best focus tracking or really specialist optics like tilt/shift.

Like yourself I originally bought into the system thinking I'd have a compact backup with decent IQ [I just jumped in a few years ago with the GF1/20mm]. There was I think a little bit more of a gap at that time between the 12Mp MFT sensor and the best of the APSCs. That gap has all but disappeared. I reckon the EM1 betters the noise handling of the GF1 by a good 2 stops, even at 100% - in spite of upping the pixel count.

Chris_L
Chris_L e2 Member 1022 forum postsChris_L vcard United Kingdom
26 Aug 2014 - 4:43 PM


Quote: I originally bought into the system thinking I'd have a compact backup with decent IQ

That's kinda how I was thinking. I'm totally sold on this system now. Couple of more lenses and a back-up body (2nd hand older model peanuts) and I could think about a total switch!

Paul Morgan
Paul Morgan e2 Member 1315463 forum postsPaul Morgan vcard England6 Constructive Critique Points
26 Aug 2014 - 5:18 PM


Quote: Sorry I'm still brand new to the system and I didn't mean to suggest that Olympus lenses were better. I think my worry came from the fact that I ended up buying Olympus lenses and then I kept reading how they were stabilized when attached to Olympus bodies.

It's as if they are saying that Olympus lenses have some kind of internal IS circuitry (or mechanics even) that's only activated when connected to Olympus bodies. It's a curious thing to point out that the lens is stabilized when attached to a body with IS - wouldn't you be able to say the same about any lens that was attached to a body that itself had IS?

If I`m using lenses of 90 equ or wider more often than not I switch the inbody IS off but for video it a killer feature especially the five axis variant and saves the need for bulky third party rigs.

It just that every single lens you can Imagine will be stabilized, even all my lensbabys that I know your not a fan of work a treat Smile

lemmy
lemmy  71896 forum posts United Kingdom
26 Aug 2014 - 7:07 PM


Quote: The GX7 scores 1% less than the EM5 which tops the mid mirrorless roundup.

I wonder what that means, don't you? I've over 50 years experience of cameras yet I have no conception of how a camera that was 1% better than another would be or feel or why it would affect anyone's buying decision. I mean, a shutter that you preferred the sound of would be more important than that 1%, wouldn't it?

Given that all the current MFT cameras are much of a muchness in performance and exceed most user needs, the best way to choose between an E-M5 and a GX7 is to pick them up and see which one you like. I suppose that kind of sidelines the armchair experts with their statistics, though.

I have a horrible feeling that the crusty old pipe smoking 1950s camera club technical geezers in their woolly cardigans and waving their test charts are coming to the fore in photography once again Sad

Add a Comment

You must be a member to leave a comment

Username:
Password:
Remember me:
Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.