EVF on the G1

<p>Just curious what you actual owners think about the elect. viewfinder.... I am interested in the camera, but it kind of scares me.</p>

<p>You just have to try it. Lots of people (me included) think it's great, but some hate it. Of the viewfinders on cameras I've personally owned (Olympus E-1, Nikon D40, Olympus OM-2, G1), I think the G1 viewfinder is definitely preferable to the E-1 and D40 finders, and is about comparable to the OM-2 finder. By comparable, I mean that I'd have a hard time picking between them, not that they're the same. The OM-2 is bigger and has higher resolution, but the G1 is brighter, has better eye relief, and offers tricks like image review, histogram, magnified manual focus, etc...</p>

<p>I have been shooting exclusively with the G1 for the past couple of weeks as I learn all its features and controls, learn what I need for my work.</p>

<p>Yesterday I picked up my E-1 fitted with the Summilux-D 25mm f/1.4 ASPH for the first time in a bit ... and wow, that viewfinder is dim and small by comparison. Of course, my eye normalized in a few minutes ... the E-1 viewfinder is hardly dim or small ... but the difference in apparent clarity and brightness is quite breathtaking when you get used to the G1's EVF. </p>

<p>I compared a little more formally my three camera using the same lens, the Panasonic L1, Olympus E-1 and Panasonic G1 (G1 viewfinder settings at default brightness). The G1 viewfinder appears to my eye between 25 and 30% larger than the L1 and 2.5 stops brighter; it appears between 10-15% larger and a stop brighter than the E-1. </p>

<p>Frankly, the G1 is just a great camera. It works brilliantly, makes great photos, and does just about everything the way I expect it to. </p>

<p>Godfrey</p>

<p>To begin with the conclusion, I love the EVF of G1. The finder image is as large as 35mm full frame SLR. The camera raises the EVF gain automatically in dim condition, which is another forte of EVF. The frame rate is noticeably dropped and the image becomes quite grainy when the gain is raised, but this problem is made up for by the great advantage of the easiness of viewing dark subjects.<br>

<br /> The new concept of G1 is, of course, not free from disadvantages. If your shooting style requires continuous shooting mode, G1 is almost useless because what you see during the shooting is the still image that is captured right before you push the release button: you cannot keep tracking the target either throuhgh EVF or LCD!<br>

<br /> Personally, I've never used continuous shooting mode even when I used Nikon D2H, so for me, G1 is the camera that I would welcome highly.<br>

<br /> Actually, the EVF image is too bright to me. Although the latest firmware (ver. 1.1) enabled you to adjust the brightness of EVF in addition to that of LCD, the EVF is still too bright even set to the lowest. So, I cut a Fuji ND 0.9 (equiv. of ND8) sheet filter to fit the finder eyepiece and put under the eyepiece rubber. Now I feel very comfortable with the brightness of EVF (still set at the lowest, though).</p>

<p>I asked a similar question about a month ago and got some helpful responses. In fact, I bought the camera.</p>

<p>http://www.photo.net/olympus-camera-forum/00RmCj</p>

<p>Thank you all for those responses, I am happy to see no one really slammed it, so now I'll try to find one local to try out. </p>

<p>I only had a minute to look through it last month. I am pleased to see that Panasonic has been able to make these finders so agreeable. That is my recollection at least...Now this thread has me looking seriously at that camera, the first in its class yet. Only question that puzzles me and calls for some research is the adaptability of existing 4/3 lenses because I am getting a little confused by something I read about the move to a different focus system than the original big boy 4/3.(When in doubt I usually wait.) I don't want to replace my 14-54 mark I nor ED f 2.0 50mm, nor EC-14,than you...Yet, shucks, it is beginning to look like Olympus will not be delivering their own model until late in the year. I go back to Ritz now that Xmas crush is past and when my friend Hal, the most affable salesguy in the bleeding world is there to pull the cam out and let me fiddle with it with no hovering toe tapping..(.Hal even likely knows some of the intrigues or whatever between the Oly USA and Ritz/Wolf that were rumored to make Olympus a no show or camera non grata at Ritz for some time).</p>

<p>It is nice to talk tech talk on cameras with someone face to face now and then..and am glad Ritz has a few silver boxes on shelf finally... Godfrey, durn it you got me a little more and more interested in the G-1 for sure. Or maybe I havent spent enough money this month on gas...Thanks a bunch. And thanks. Chris, old chap, for asking the starter question. Ke me aloha as they say in flatbush,( i jest),gs...</p>

<p>Gerry,<br /> <br /> The current FourThirds compatibility chart is posted at <br /> <a href="http://panasonic.jp/support/global/cs/dsc/connect/g1.html"> http://panasonic.jp/support/global/cs/dsc/connect/g1.html</a>.<br /> <br /> About nine FourThirds SLR lenses are AF compatible with the G1 using the Panasonic DMW-MA1 adapter, the rest work fine but manual focus only so far. I've used the camera with the Oly 11-22, 25*, 35 Macro, 50-200 and with the Panasonic/Leica 25* and 14-50 as well as its supplied 14-45*. They all work very nicely, but only the * lenses AF. <br /> <br /> There are more lenses coming from Panasonic, and will be more coming from Olympus when they get their act rolling, I'm sure. I also expect Olympus will post more firmware updates enhancing the list of AF compatible lenses as it approaches time for them to release their micro43 camera. <br /> <br /> Godfrey</p>

<p>Japanese original compatibility chart is slightly newer:</p>

<p>Zuiko Digital 14-54mm F2.8-3.5 II (newer version of standard 14-54 zoom): OK(*1) AFS, MF</p>

<p>I wonder if Olympus is planning a method to make their version more compatible with their lens line, if not I think many users may be upset!</p>

<p>I totally agree with you Patrick, I sure hope so.... I am not a huge fan of AF to begin with, but trying to use AF lenses in MF mode is not my idea of fun. That said, I love the fact you could mount just about any piece of legacy glass on the G1 you want. I just wish they made an MFT version of the L1 that would be styled and handle like an m8 (or better yet be the size of a Leica CL:) I'd settle for any flat top design with a shutter speed dial on the top and a left offset viewfinder window. </p>

<p>Let's wait to see what Olympus comes up with.</p>

<p>Slightly off the topic, but several people asked me offline about the G1's higher ISO quality recently. I thought you'd enjoy seeing an example of what to expect from it.<br /> <br /> RAW capture, G1 with v1.1 firmware.<br /> <br /> <img src="http://homepage.mac.com/godders/G1-iso1000-test.jpg" alt="" /><br /> <br /> Processed in Lightroom 2.2 at the defaults plus a little bit of adjustment for crop, white balance and ev compensation. Downsized for web display.</p>

<p><br /> Godfrey</p>

<p>That ZD 25mm plus G-1 looks like a neat combination. Godfrey, do you happen to have a photo of the G-1 and lens attached (with E-1 or L-1 perhaps for scale in the photo). Thanks. I was going to wait on adding any more 4/3 bodies and just go for the 70-300 mm this Spring.Unless the E 30 comes along a little more attractive in price sooner rather than later. I have,(apropos of nothing special), been doing macro copies of some old stereo slides with the E-1 mounted on a home made rig -with decent results- only inconvenience I have no right angle finder,have to perch on tiptoe and be careful not to shake the rig. And I am not about to buy the Oly R/A adapter at this point. I am thinking the G-1 body might be great for that copy work as well as other routine stuff, with my 50mm in manual mode- as all serious closeup work perforce has to be IMO. That 25 mm looks fairly sharp indeed. If I didn't have my 14-54 and the 50mm....</p>

<p>I guess I was eager to see how the G-1 plus adapter plus a typical ED lens hangs together. Hey no hurry, When you get time,thanks...<br>

One day I will make a photo of my rig if anyone is interested. I use an old focus rack and a Hakuba small light box. And a used but nice Novoflex focus rack. And am getting focus and settings w the electronic release for the E-1. It seems to work well enough so that I don't need to mess with a costly Nikon slide copier for the time being. Got enough boxes around here lately:-)</p>

<p> </p><div></div>

<p><em>... do you happen to have a photo of the G-1 and lens attached (with E-1 or L-1 perhaps for scale in the photo)... </em><br /> <br /> Your wish is fulfilled: <br /> <br /> <img src="http://homepage.mac.com/godders/G1_v_L1-comparison.jpg" alt="" /><br /> <br /> Happened to also snap a quick pic of the G1 fitted with Nikkor 180 on the Olympus 1.4x teleconverter too: <br /> <br /> <img src="http://homepage.mac.com/godders/G1_w_EC14_180.jpg" alt="" /><br /> <br /> enjoy<br /> Godfrey</p>

<p>btw, full scale photo of the side by side above is available at <br>

http://homepage.mac.com/godders/G1_v_L1-comparison.jpg</p>

<p>Godfrey</p>

<p>Interesting, mucho thanks, Godfrey. I will have a closer look perhaps at the G-1 this weekend. Never have had chance to really play with the E-3 since it came out and I am wondering if they will have one in stock and out of a box to look at. They may have dropped it, suggested Hal. Seemed like that baby was not selling well at this Ritz ( tourist stop at our fanciest mall-Tiffany and Swarovski and such boutiques frequented by Japanese visitors). I rely and depend on reports by E system users here and experienced folks at the fourthirds photo of which there are several(Plus Dr. Wrotniak and John Foster.) It will take some demo to convince me that I can use any of my Canon FD lenses. But who knows. I got some Medium Format glass too..guess that wouldn't go well. gs</p>

<p>How is the compatibility of the Oly 12-60 that seems from the test in Dpreview to be a great lens.<br>

On the EVR this is just the beginning of solving the basic problems of panning while shooting having lags, but the results justify so far using HD lcd VF to get rid of mirror slap and parallex which are the two main problems in slr's and rf cameras.</p>

<p>Harvey, </p>

<p>As you can see from the compatibility page posted earlier in the thread, the 12-60 is compatible using the mount adapter but manual focus only at this time. I have no experience using the 12-60 other than testing it in the camera shop; it would seem a bit bulky fitted to the G1, to me, for casual use.</p>

<p>The more I use this camera, the more I'm convinced that for me the ideal lenses are compact, fast primes ... the Oly 25/2.8, the upcoming 20/1.7 and the Nokton 40/1.4 and Color Heliar 75/2.5 fitted to an M-bayonet adapter: should be a great kit.</p>

<p>Godfrey</p>

<p>Godfrey your right its big but it has its use as a one lens carry system with that wide 35mm equivalent 24-120mm range at a fast F-stop.<br>

<br /> For me this u4/3 would allow me to use a selection of my best manual Leica, Zeiss, VC, Pentax lenses for the cost of a Nikon, Pentax and Leica adapters from the likes of Rayval.<br>

I am thinking my Nikon 28mmf2.0 and 50mm f1.2 ; my Pentax 135mm f2.3, my Zeiss 25mm Biogon and VC 21mm F4 would be nice. My leica 35mm F2.0 summicron would be a nice 70mm equivalent too.<br>

But I think from past experience I would have to buy one lens from the actual format to cover the extreme end of the wide angle because of the 2x cropping factor. My likings are as wide as 24 mm which is about 82 degrees acceptance angle, I find on 35mm my Nikon 20-35 zoom usually looks better to me no wider than 24mm even though I could go as wide as 20mm.<br>

I hope Olympus updates the lens to be AF compatible you could alway turn off a feature if it is not so valuable, but its better to have a choice.</p>

<p>I guess I don't really consider an f/2.8-4 lens to be all that fast. I want at least 20/2, 40/2, and 75/2.5 ... and the 12-60 has some odd wave-distortion at 12mm from the photos I've seen. </p>

<p>I don't like zooms much anyway. ;-)</p>

<p>Godfrey</p>

<p>One not-so-much-discussed truth about G1 is that the camera corrects distortion and chromatic aberration in the camera when it creates JPEG files. RAW files are not processed in the camera, of course, but the aberrations are automatically corrected by the accompanying special version of SILKYPIX software.</p>

<p>I have talked to a person of Panasonic's support center directly and according to him, G1 can correct these aberrations of all of the current M4/3 AND 4/3 lenses by Panasonic, Olympus and Sigma even though most of 4/3 lenses cannot autofocus.</p>

<p>My humble complaint would be that I would have liked the kit lens to be something like 12-40 or 12-36. As with the usual correction process of distortion of the lens, the angle-of-view of the final image is slightly narrowered. So, 14mm end of the kit lens doesn't seem to be "28mm equivalent" actually, strictly speaking.</p>

<p>Now, I'm interested in what M4/3 lenses Olympus will offer. :)</p>

<p>I suspect that the Panasonic support person you spoke to greatly overstated this, Akira. </p>

<p>The G1 embeds lens correction data into the RAW files when it's available. It is easily detectable by running the .RW2 files through DNG Converter v5.2. When there is lens correction metadata in the files, DNG Converter v5.2 must default to a linear representation of the RAW data, expanding the component channels to apply the lens correction metadata. </p>

<p>I made a batch of test shots of a subject with a straight frame, with both the L1 and G1 using the Olympus 25mm, the Leica 25mm, the Leica 14-50 @ 25mm, and the Lumix G 14-45 @ 25mm (on the G1 only, of course). I moved both RAW and JPEG files into Lightroom and ran DNG Converter on all of the RAW files. </p>

<p>- Only the Panasonic lenses, both the zooms and the 25/1.4, showed evidence of having lens correction metadata embedded in the RAW files based on the conversion DNG sizes. </p>

<p>- There was no difference in the rectilinear correction evident between the RAW and JPEG image pairs in all cases, with either camera. This says that if the G1's JPEG engine is doing rectilinear correction with the Panasonic lenses, so is Lightroom 2's RAW conversion. </p>

<p>- There is a small improvement in the CA correction of both the Leica 25 and 14-50 when compared between the L1 and G1, for both RAW and JPEG siblings, so some correction data is being applied by the G1 there and it is understood by Lightroom 2. Note that the 14-50/2.8-3.5 can only operate as manual focus on the G1 where the other three lenses all autofocus. </p>

<p>- There is no difference in CA correction of the Olympus 25mm lens between the L1 and G1, so no correction seems to be applied in that case by the G1. </p>

<p>I can believe that more correction data is embedded into files made with the Lumix G lenses and that with a "dumb" RAW converter, one which did not understand the lens correction metadata, you would see a difference to the rectilinear correction between RAW and JPEG captures with that lens. And that Panasonic FourThirds lenses have lens correction data for CA built into them as well. But there is no evidence by this test to support a statement that the G1 will do rectilinear and chromatic aberration correction for all FourThirds and micro-FourThirds lenses. </p>

<p>I think I'd have preferred if it the kit lens was the 20mm f/1.7, personally. :-)</p>

<p>Godfrey</p>

<p>Godfrey, I can understand how you feel about lenses slower than f/2.0 that is why I also think that is the sweet spot these days, faster lenses are rarely great wide open, and with todays digitals being much better at iso 800 and 160 than film at 400 a camera such as the G1 without mirror slap should be hand holdable to 1/15 th or 1/30 th sec. That said I was always able to use my Pro level Nikon F/2.8 zooms with no problem and if I can do two stops faster with digital with the higher iso then its a go. Also, Noise Ninja can mop up some noise too on OK files that started in RAW.<br>

For what its worth here is what Dpreview said about the 12-60mm that puts it in the select group of best zooms.<br>

Indeed the Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 12-60mm F2.8-4.0 SWD is quite simply a superb lens, which can lay claim to being one of the very best standard zooms currently available. This is a design which would have been almost unimaginable even five years ago; a 5x wideangle to telephoto zoom which, though the use of some exotic optics, manages to perform almost flawlessly across its entire range, and throws in some impressive macro performance too. The relatively fast maximum aperture (a half to a full stop faster than APS-C equivalents such as the Sony Carl Zeiss 16-80mm F3.5-4.5 or Nikon 16-85mm F:3.5-5.6 VR), coupled with the excellent wide-open performance, also allows the use of lower ISOs at equivalent light levels for maximum image quality.<br>

There are a few minor caveats though; that macro performance is achieved at a very short working distance, which causes problems with lighting of the subject when the front element is as little as 5cm away, and the lens is also sufficiently bulky as to cause shadowing of the built-in flash with more compact DSLRs such as the E510 and E4x0 series. Also the distortion at wideangle is very pronounced, and unusually complex, which means users will have to reach for specialist software tools if they wish to correct it. But these really do have to be seen as relatively minor quibbles in the context of the overall performance of this lens.<br>

Of course perhaps the biggest issue with this lens is its price; it's far from cheap for a standard zoom, but this is a case where you really do get what you pay for. Indeed Olympus have managed to surpass the already excellent 14-54mm with a lens which is demonstrably sharper at all focal lengths and generally shows less chromatic aberration, whilst extending the range at both ends. For anyone wanting to get the best possible results from their Four Thirds camera, it's therefore highly recommended.<br>

You were right about the wide end but 24mm for me is real wide and 28mm may be better and enough for me considering I could alway do stitching several frames I like pano proportion anyway so a nice 2.5:1 like the xpan look done with stitching is worth the extra work.</p>

<p>DPReview's opinion is no better than mine, imo ... ;-)</p>

<p>Between the three FourThirds lenses (Olympus 12-60/2.8-4, Olympus 14-54/2.8-3.5 and Panasonic/Leica 14-50/2.8-3.5 ASPH OIS) which one works better is really more a matter of personal taste than anything else, Harvey, because they're all darn good. I feel the Leica 14-50/2.8-3.5 has the best OOF rendering of them having spent a lot of time comparing it and the 14-54 and only a little time on the , and of course the OIS has great value on the G1 body. I have an Olympus 11-22/2.8-3.5 for when I need wider. Of course, the real magilla beauty in this focal length range is the Olympus ZD 14-35/2 ... a top pro lens in every possible way, faster and nicer than the other three. If I could afford it, I'd have one for the L1 and E-1 immediately. </p>

<p>But here we're talking big, heavy, pro grade SLR glass, which is not what I want for the G1. Gimme that itty bitty 20/1.7 and the Nokton 40/1.4 and the Color Heliar 75/2.5 :: I'll be very happy. </p>

<p>Godfrey</p>