Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Cameras, Lenses and Shooting gear => Topic started by: AlfSollund on June 23, 2011, 02:01:58 pm
-
Hi,
The choice is as I see it between Panasonic LUMIX G 7-14mm F4 ASPH and Olympus M.Zuiko Dig ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6.
So please help me out with this:
- no SW correction for fault by Olympus in the GH-2 (as with the Pana glasses)?
- Possible to correct optical faults (distortion + chromatic aberration) in other SW (Lightroom, ...)? Yes, CA can be corrected by Cornerfix.
- Shouldnt worry about this at all?
Thanks in advance!
-
Panasonic cameras don't correct Oly lenses, and vice versa, which kinda makes sense from a business perspective. Yes, you can do correction in LR/PS with Adobe's free lens profiler. Note that making your own profiles is a major PITA, but perhaps someone has made profiles for GH2+lens combo.
9-18mm is a stellar lens, but it would benefit from correction. Below uncorrected (since I haven't made profiles, yet) shot at wide(st?) setting with the 7-14mm.
Another option is to wait for the Olympus 12mm f/2.0 (http://www.43rumors.com/ft5-12mm-f2-0-is-an-all-metal-lens-with-and-has-distance-meter/) to be announced on June 30th - it's supposed to be really good. If that's the case I'll probably sell my 7-14 so that's another option for you ;)
(http://www.harrijahkola.com/img/guatemala/Guatemala_-_Flores_(Business).jpg)
edit: and I was talking about the Panasonic 7-14mm above, not the Oly 9-18mm.
-
I've got a 7-14 coming and plan on the Olympus 12/f2 when it shows ..
-
I have the Panny 14/2.5, which is a nice little (very little) lens. Played with a 7-14 at a camera store, took some test photos, looks great. Would have been useful in Utah last week, but couldn't spend the money right now. ($700 used, which is very reasonable I thought.)
-
it's a damn shame the 7-14 doesn't take filters. that forced me to get the 14/2.5. nicely wide and decently fast, but not screaming fast. I am looking forward to the planned slr magic 12mm f/1.6 noktor (http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&hl=en-GB&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GGHP_enCA415CA415&q=slr+magic+12+f%2f1.6+noktor#sclient=psy&hl=en&rlz=1T4GGHP_enCA415CA415&source=hp&q=slr+magic+12mm+f%2F1.6+noktor&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=c924775ad1dac27b&biw=1536&bih=694) if it ever arrrives.
-
Question: what filter would you want to place on the 7-14?
The only filter I use anymore is a polarizer, and using one on a very wide lens is less than optimal.
-
it's a damn shame the 7-14 doesn't take filters. that forced me to get the 14/2.5. nicely wide and decently fast, but not screaming fast. I am looking forward to the planned slr magic 12mm f/1.6 noktor (http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&hl=en-GB&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GGHP_enCA415CA415&q=slr+magic+12+f%2f1.6+noktor#sclient=psy&hl=en&rlz=1T4GGHP_enCA415CA415&source=hp&q=slr+magic+12mm+f%2F1.6+noktor&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=c924775ad1dac27b&biw=1536&bih=694) if it ever arrrives.
Thats a good point. I use pola a lot, and with all due respect I have to disagree with k bennett; I fing pola filters highly useful on wides. I use 18 and 28mm a lot on FF, and for flyfishing photos this is a must-have.
-
Depends on the subject, I suppose. For blue sky shots, I won't go wider than 28mm (ff equivalent) with a polarizer. Got burned one too many times with a 24 or wider. For reducing reflections on water or other objects, sure, you can go as wide as you want and it'll still work fine.
-
I've found c-pols on my FF 20mm managable. The main reason I bought into the m4/3rds was to play with video, so the filters I would want to use are a circular polarizer and neutral density as the shutter speed is set at 1 / (frame rate) & ISO only goes so far.
That leads to this question: With all the gimmicks like auto HDR & sweep panoramic, why can't camera designers implement low ISOs? The GH2 in video has a floor of 160. Why can't it go to 100, 50, 25, 12, 6 etc. ? Speaking of which, why can't any camera maker do that? Would greatly reduce the need for ND filters.