Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: G1 with Leica  (Read 6261 times)

John Camp

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2171
G1 with Leica
« on: April 22, 2009, 11:12:34 pm »

I also have a G1 and several Leica lenses, with a CameraQuest adapter, and pretty much agree with Michael's report on the combination. I've found that the G1 is a terrific car and travel camera -- I will not again be taking my Nikon D3 and D300 on extended trips, unless the trip is specifically to do photography. I would also point out that Sean Reid, on his site, finds that at least the wider Leica lenses are not as sharp in the corners as the Panasonic lenses, and the difference, as shown in 100 percent crops, is dramatic. He believes it has to do with the way the lenses direct the light rays on to the sensor. (The Reid site is a pay site.)

Before I moved on to other endeavors, I was a  newspaper reporter who occasionally shot photos for publication (because photography was my hobby, and I could.) My feeling is that a G1 IQ would be fine for about 90% of the photography that appears in a newspaper; that is, for almost all non-specialty work, such as sports and night shots. Even for night shots, a G1 would match what we used to do with Tri-X, but does not match the capabilities of a D3. Some people have suggested that sophisticated consumer or prosumer cameras like the D90 or the upcoming D5000 would be preferable to a G1 type, because of the slightly larger sensor and access to the bigger system, but that misses the point of the G1, which is to remain compact while providing excellent quality. Even if you're using a D90, or a D5000, you still have to put a Nikon lens on the camera, and the lenses are as bulky as the bodies.

As a fine-art camera, where IQ counts above all, the G1 can't match the big guns from Nikon, Canon or Sony, and, of course, it doesn't have the system support; but I was walking around yesterday with the camera in one hand and the second lens in my jacket pocket covering a range from wide to quite long, and never noticed the weight. Can't do that with a D3.    

JC
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
G1 with Leica
« Reply #1 on: April 23, 2009, 04:50:57 am »

Quote from: John Camp
As a fine-art camera, where IQ counts above all, the G1 can't match the big guns from Nikon, Canon or Sony, and, of course, it doesn't have the system support; but I was walking around yesterday with the camera in one hand and the second lens in my jacket pocket covering a range from wide to quite long, and never noticed the weight. Can't do that with a D3.    

JC


John

IQ counts above all. Brave statement and perhaps applicable in some situations or a milieu where narow parameters apply. But that, of course, forces the question of what, exactly, is meant by IQ?

Your D3 problem with walkabouts is without solution. I faced the same with every possible combination after my heart event some six or so years ago; I took to carrying a single body with a single lens and tailoring my pics to suit that combination, whatever it was on the day, and it was both satisfying, sharpening of the mind but also restrictive in the extreme. Then along came digital and dust and the single lens/body formula became rigid. Eventually, just some few weeks ago, in fact, I though I´d solve the problem by getting a 24-70mm 2.8 Nikkor.  Which I did. And it´s so heavy I have still not taken it walkies. In other words, I´m probably back to where I came in.

As for taking out a second division camera - the concept defeats me. I´d rather just do without than risk blowing something good that comes along (I´m old enough to recognize Sod´s Law). Somehow, a second-level camera brings to mind adult dependency on a rubber teat. Nothing personal about you - I don´t even know you -  just about how the idea strikes me.

Rob C

dalethorn

  • Guest
G1 with Leica
« Reply #2 on: April 23, 2009, 06:17:45 am »

Quote from: Rob C
As for taking out a second division camera - the concept defeats me. I´d rather just do without than risk blowing something good that comes along (I´m old enough to recognize Sod´s Law). Somehow, a second-level camera brings to mind adult dependency on a rubber teat. Nothing personal about you - I don´t even know you -  just about how the idea strikes me.
Rob C

Perhaps a Leica M8-3, then?
Logged

David Mantripp

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 826
    • :: snowhenge dot net ::
G1 with Leica
« Reply #3 on: April 23, 2009, 09:25:33 am »

Quote from: Rob C
As for taking out a second division camera - the concept defeats me. I´d rather just do without than risk blowing something good that comes along (I´m old enough to recognize Sod´s Law). Somehow, a second-level camera brings to mind adult dependency on a rubber teat. Nothing personal about you - I don´t even know you -  just about how the idea strikes me.

Rob C

What exactly is a "second level camera" ?   Sounds to me you're not really into photography.  I very much doubt that there are more than a few edge cases where, in a casual "walkabout" scenario, a D3 could get you an image which a G1 could not.  Unless you're expecting to print everything larger than A2.....    There are arguments against the G1, for example the EVF, but I doubt that you could reliably tell the difference between G1 and D3 prints in the vast majority of situations.

Still, whatever floats your boat....
Logged
--
David Mantripp

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
G1 with Leica
« Reply #4 on: April 23, 2009, 10:57:48 am »

[quote name='drm' date='Apr 23 2009, 01:25 PM' post='278395']
What exactly is a "second level camera" ?   Sounds to me you're not really into photography.  


Q1   What exactly is a second-level camera?

A1   An FM or FM2 compared with an F, F2, F3, F4, F5 and right up into the stratosphere. And yes, having worked with both in parallel, I do know the difference in results. I shall not even attempt to address the matter with digital.



S1   Sounds to me  you´re not really into photography.

A2   Interesting. My accountant, lawyer, clients and, above all the taxman, would also be interested to hear you say that.

Sweet rêveries

Rob C

ceyman

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 45
G1 with Leica
« Reply #5 on: April 23, 2009, 11:50:16 am »

After looking at the comparison pictures I was surprised by Michael's statement that he didn't see enough difference to warrant the hassle of using the Leica glass.  The image on the right looks significantly better on my monitor.  Perhaps the difference doesn't show on a print, but I found the richer color and the delicacy of the leaves a compelling difference on the screen.

carl
Logged

Avotius

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9
G1 with Leica
« Reply #6 on: April 23, 2009, 11:58:40 am »

I had a G1 with the thought of using my M mount lenses on it and I was quite disappointed. The camera just never felt like the kind that you would want to pick up and use. I didnt think focusing was so easy and when I shot with the kit lens and my M mount lenses I felt that there was something missing in the whole experience of the camera. In the end I sold it and have no regrets. I kept the adapter however and eagerly await Olympus's mythical compact m/43 camera.

Here is a little test I did side by side with some lenses and the 14-45 kit lens:

Logged

maxgruzen

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 128
    • http://www.pbase.com/mordicai
G1 with Leica
« Reply #7 on: April 23, 2009, 12:02:54 pm »

For me a big part of my equipment selection in not the camera but the lens. I'm not  really interested in reproducing the scene but in creating an image that moves me. I shot for a while with a Canon G9, loved the camera, but missed the quality of my dslr and my Canon lenses. The creative options I have with lenses  like my 85 1.2 can not me matched with what Rob calls 2nd tier cameras.
Logged

John Camp

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2171
G1 with Leica
« Reply #8 on: April 23, 2009, 12:15:56 pm »

Quote from: Rob C
As for taking out a second division camera - the concept defeats me. I´d rather just do without than risk blowing something good that comes along (I´m old enough to recognize Sod´s Law). Somehow, a second-level camera brings to mind adult dependency on a rubber teat. Nothing personal about you - I don´t even know you -  just about how the idea strikes me.
Rob C

I don't do art photography; I do some journalism still, and some documentary stuff (the reason for the D3/D300) and a lot of note-taking. I was on a note-taking trip to northern Minnesota yesterday when I came across a house fire just at dusk. I picked up the G1 and fired a shot out the window  of the car, and when I looked at it later, realized that the G1 would have been all I would have needed if I were shooting it for a newspaper. So, the question becomes, a second-division camera for what? If I were a professional PJ, I'd be pretty interested in a light, fast, flexible camera system, as opposed to the overweight pigs that the Nikons and Canons have become. I'd say (from experience) that if a newspaper photo department issued all its photographers G1s -- at a huge savings over the Nikons and Canons that now dominate -- and then kept a couple D3s around for specialty work, that there would be no perceptible decline in photo quality. The best PJ I ever knew,, in the days when the F5 was dominate, used his own N90x because it gave him almost everything an F5 did, with good weight-savings. Cameras have other qualities than IQ, especially when you're dealing in the realm of "good enough."
Logged

paratom

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 205
G1 with Leica
« Reply #9 on: April 24, 2009, 03:56:35 am »

I also tried to use a Leica lens on the G1 (my wifes camera) and I came to the same conclusion: When I use the G1 I want the Pana-lens with AF etc. If I want to use a Leica lens I want to use it on my M8.
If you focus the Leica lens manually with magnifier you can focus prcisely, but you cant compose any more. In this regard I much much prefer the M8.
Also while the EVF of the Pana is pretty good for a EVF its still a totally different feel than a optical viewfinder.
I am surprized how good those Pana-Zooms optically work for the price.
The only thing is that they are slow and you wont produce any shallow DOF with those lenses. So please Pana fast primes with 10, 18,25,45 and 90mm
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
G1 with Leica
« Reply #10 on: April 24, 2009, 04:45:19 am »

Quote from: John Camp
I don't do art photography; I do some journalism still, and some documentary stuff (the reason for the D3/D300) and a lot of note-taking.Cameras have other qualities than IQ, especially when you're dealing in the realm of "good enough."



Thanks for the ´journalistic´ out of good enough! That simply confirms my point about second-tier equipment, further strengthened by the financial rationale behind the thinking.

But, having said that, I do agree that the commercial map is a pretty broad one and that not all requirements are the same. However, in the general scheme of things and within the context of LuLa, I guess that the majority of people is not using cameras for commercial purposes, in which case I expect it has a love-connection with what it´s trying to do and would be hoping for the best possible results at all times, results that are always dependent on the weakest link in the chain, pro or am!

Your earlier mention of IQ within the fine art context was really the point that got my attention, far more so than whether camera A is as good as camera B or such matters; it seems to me that there really is no definition for IQ within photographic art, merely some vague gallerista patter that perhaps smacks more of situation ethics than anything more concrete or definitive. Considering that the fine painting world has struggled with the same point for many centuries longer than photography has been around augurs no speedy conclusion!

But this could threaten to hi-jack the thread, so I´ll leave it there.

Rob C

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10365
G1 with Leica
« Reply #11 on: April 24, 2009, 06:14:14 am »

Quote from: Avotius
Here is a little test I did side by side with some lenses and the 14-45 kit lens:



The Panasonic 14-45 seems to be sharpest at 18mm and F3.9 (full aperture). That's quite remarkable, that a zoom lens could be sharpest at full aperture. It also appears to be very sharp at F5.6 at 14mm and 18mm, according to Photozone tests. Unfortunately, sharpness at the edges leaves something to be desired.
Logged

Nemo

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 276
G1 with Leica
« Reply #12 on: April 24, 2009, 07:25:15 am »

Almost any camera and lens can give you results similar to those of any other camera and lens...for particular print sizes and subjects, but that isn't the point. The point is in the differences in limit cases (large prints); AND in the aesthetics of the image in many other cases.

Even in A3 prints you can see the difference between a picture from a MF system and a picture from an APS-C system, for particular subjects, of course. If you focus to infinite and set the aperture to f/16... you will not see differences, but you will see them in a portrait. The tridimensionality and sutile tonal gradation of the MF image is very special. What happens is many MF users are lanscape photographers. Studio photographers (advertising, portraits, etc.) also use MF systems, but many abandoned their MF equipment long ago, mostly due to cost and superb quality of full frame 35mm system (exceeding that most clients want).
Logged

David Mantripp

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 826
    • :: snowhenge dot net ::
G1 with Leica
« Reply #13 on: April 24, 2009, 09:45:47 am »

Quote from: Nemo
Even in A3 prints you can see the difference between a picture from a MF system and a picture from an APS-C system, for particular subjects, of course.

With respect, maybe you can. Maybe I can, if I try hard. But will the average audience, or even client, see any significant difference ? I'm not convinced.
Logged
--
David Mantripp

dalethorn

  • Guest
G1 with Leica
« Reply #14 on: April 24, 2009, 06:44:56 pm »

Quote from: drm
With respect, maybe you can. Maybe I can, if I try hard. But will the average audience, or even client, see any significant difference ? I'm not convinced.

If they only buy a handful, maybe not. But when the comparisons go up, they begin to catch on.
Logged

charleski

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 34
G1 with Leica
« Reply #15 on: April 28, 2009, 06:06:53 pm »

For me the key factor here is how nasty and fussy the bokeh from the Summilux are compared to the 'consumer' Panasonic lens. (The one on the left is the Panasonic, right?) It's a little more contrasty and the Panasonic has a cool cast to it, but those bokeh are enough to cure me of any desire.
Logged

pegelli

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1664
    • http://pegelli.smugmug.com/
G1 with Leica
« Reply #16 on: April 29, 2009, 04:11:12 am »

Quote from: Rob C
John

As for taking out a second division camera - the concept defeats me. I´d rather just do without than risk blowing something good that comes along (I´m old enough to recognize Sod´s Law). Somehow, a second-level camera brings to mind adult dependency on a rubber teat. Nothing personal about you - I don´t even know you -  just about how the idea strikes me.

Rob C

Problem with this logic is where do you stop, or what is a first division camera?. Is it the G1 (I think from your story it isn't), a D300 or D50, an A900, a D3(x), a MF back or will only the new P65 do, or do we stay with 4x5 or 8x10 sheet film and a top of the line drum scanner.

I'm also the reverse from you in your other thought, I'd rather have a nice pic printed on A4 from a decent P&S to preserve a memory than not having the shot because I left my DSLR at home, but I recognise that's a personal choice.

Last remark, I'm 52 and don't know Sod's law, any advice is welcome  
« Last Edit: April 29, 2009, 05:14:49 am by pegelli »
Logged
pieter, aka pegelli
Pages: [1]   Go Up