Who uses 4/3 to complement a Pro DSLR body?

[tdigi]

<p>I have a 5D2 with a bunch of lenses but I really want something smaller that is of good quality. I have had my eye on a Panasonic GF1. Does anyone use these 4/3 cameras as a small option to their DSLR? Is there some sort of adaptor to use my Canon Lenses with the Panasonic? What lenses does Panasonic make that are wider and fast. I would probably opt for the Pancake lens but I would like something fast that is wider too.</p>

[wmc718]

<p>Tommy,<br>

I have (and I know some other professionals and advanced amatuers) who have actually <em>replaced </em>their DSLRs with micro four-thirds. Of course, this highly depends on the kind of shooting you do. (If you're into high ISO, high-speed shooting and finalize in poster-size prints, the GF1 is probably not for you.) <br>

In short, yes, there are tons of available adaptors for the G1/G2/GF1 to accommodate various lens brands out there - including Leica. To my knowledge, the 1.7 pancake is the fastest current "wide ange" available, but I've read where there's more coming.<br>

I think if you'll read others comments about their experiences with the GF1, you will find that it is an extremely satisfying camera! Good Luck!</p>

[steve_unsworth1]

<p>There won't be an adaptor for Canon EOS lenses because the aperture control is electronic. The 20mm lens is indeed excellent with a usefully shallow depth of field close up...</p>

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

[godfrey]

<p>My <em>pro</em> SLR body is the Olympus E-1 at present (will soon get an E-3) so all my pro-class SLR lenses interoperate perfectly with the Micro-FourThirds bodies. The Micro-FourThirds bodies are a wonderful complement to my SLRs. </p>

<p>Canon EOS lenses can be adapted to work on Micro-FourThirds, an adapter exists from seller "jinfinance" on Ebay. However, it is a 'dumb' adapter with no electronics ... adapted lenses can focus manually but aperture control from Micro-FourThirds bodies is impossible. Normally, they'll always be wide open. There's a simple hack to set the operating aperture you want to use with a Canon EOS body (set lens on body, set aperture, press DoF Preview and remove lens with the DoF Preview button held), but obviously that's not a general purpose ease of use solution. </p>

<p>For wide-angle lenses on Micro-FourThirds, the current 20mm f/1.7 from Panasonic and 17mm f/2.8 from Olympus work well, there's the superb Panasonic 7-14/4 and the new Olympus 9-18/4-5.6. Panasonic has announced a 14mm f/2.8 and Olympus is rumored to be doing a 12mm sometime next year. The current Olympus 11-22/2.8-3.5 and 9-18/4-5.6 from the SLR line can also be used with an adapter. The 11-22 is the widest f/2.8 lens available ... it's a superb performer. </p>

[tdigi]

<p>How is the standard zoom on the panasonic? Considering that its pretty slow it almost makes me prefer an LX3. I know the sensor is smaller but it seems more versatile as a "smaller option" I really need to find someplace that has these so I can test it out.</p>

[godfrey]

<p>The Lumix G Vario 14-45/3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS that came with my G1 is quite a nice performer while being small and light: <br /><br /> <a title="Untitled by Godfrey DiGiorgi, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2674/4063470434_326fab7ef4_o.jpg" alt="Untitled" width="800" height="800" /></a> <br /><br /> I didn't keep it because I have the Panasonic/Leica 14-50/2.8-3.5 ASPH OIS (from the L1 model) already and only rarely use zoom lenses in this range anyway. I tend to prefer to use faster primes, so the most commonly used lens on the G1 for me is either the 20mm f/1.7 or a Konica Hexanon AR 40mm f/1.8. I'm looking forward to the Panasonic 14mm f/2.8 as well. <br /><br /></p>

[ilkka]

<p>I replaced my Pentax 67 with a Sony 900. I have an E-3 for rugged jungle use and a E-620 as a small and light 4/3 body for times when I don't need the rugged weather proofing of the E-3 or the resolution of the A900. I have also the Olympus EP-1 as an even smaller travel camera but I am waiting for the right lens(es) for it. I currently have the collapsible zoom (just because it came with it for minimal additional cost) and an adapter to use the 2.8/25 pancake. To me the E-620 (or E-30) would be a good light alternative to a large (full frame) DSLR. The EP-1/2 or GF-1 would be more of a small pocket camera for times when one does not want to carry a proper camera. I would not consider it an alternative to a DSLR but possibly a back up when travelling light.</p>

[bert_bert]

<p>I actually replaced my DSLR with olympus EP2 and I am happy with my decision. I have been using DSLR for 5 years. I used to own a 40D and 5D with some L lens. No doubt, the image quality of the pics are excellent. However, photography is not just about the quality.(I am not selling my pictures anyway.) The major reasons that lead me to the decision is the weight! I don't want to carry my 5D + 70-200 f2.8 + other lens when I am relaxing on a beach. The only thing I can complain about the EP2 is the response, but I shouldn't compare it to my 5D right? I should say it takes me sometimes to get use to it.</p>

[tdigi]

<p>I could not replace my DSLR I do work with it at times but I have tried using small primes and various bags to make it easier when I am shooting for fun any many times its just fine but something smaller would probably we nice on occasion. I think something like an LX3 is probably more of what I am looking for but the 4/3 looks pretty nice. I get the impression more people are using 4/3 as a replacement not an alternative. </p>

[joseph_wisniewski]

<blockquote>

<p>There won't be an adaptor for Canon EOS lenses because the aperture control is electronic.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Controlling the Canon aperture is not hard, the serial interface is well documented and the four thirds and micro four thirds cameras can power Canon lenses. It doesn't take much processor power to translate messages from one format to the other.</p>

<p>The big problem is the four thirds serial interface. Despite all the "open specification" claims by Olympus, it's proven impossible to get access to.</p>

[godfrey]

<p>I hear this claim of "open specification" all the time, but I don't think it's ever been what Olympus meant. What they mean is that FourThirds is <em>'a specification open to be licensed by manufacturers'</em>, not that the specification was open to the public. </p>

[joseph_wisniewski]

<p>They're not open to be licensed, either. I've contacted Olympus and Kodak, through the proper channels, as part of a corporation, asked for their NDA terms, etc. and got absolutely nothing. The only third party ever to make four thirds lenses is Sigma, and my guess is that Sigma threatened to reverse engineer the mount and blow Oly's whole "open standard" scam.</p>

[godfrey]

<p>It's up to the FourThirds partners to determine whether they want to talk to you as a qualified potential partner. They're the ones in control of what constitutes "qualified".</p>

<p>Obviously, they're not interested in talking to everyone. </p>

[philip_wilson]

<p>Tommy I bought a G1 to use old FD lenses. Like you I primarily shoot EOS (5DII, 1DIIN, 7D) and have a big collection of EF glass. I would not bother trying to use EF glass on the m4/3 body as you will probably find the lenses too large and heavy even if they can be made to work. The 14-45 that came with my G1 is not a bad lens - better than most Canon kit lenses but not a stellar performer. The actual performance of the m4/3 bodies is very good - much better than a compact camera. If you want to use manual focus lenses you will probably find that you need a body with an EVF as you can generally only focus manually with the LCD on a tripod - even here the LCD is much worse in sunlight than the one on the 5DII. While I bought the G1 for use with old FD lenses I often find I carry it when I am not sure if I will use a camera due to it's small size. In these circumstances I either use the 14-45 kit or a 24 f2 Canon Fd lens.</p>

[joseph_wisniewski]

<blockquote>

<p>Obviously, they're not interested in talking to everyone.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Obviously. But can you find a single definition of "open standard" to which that applies? Not the OSI, ITU, or IETF definitions. Not even Microsoft's definition. And certainly not the EU's 2004 definition, which if I were in the EU and wanted to raise a stink, I could use to get Oly to retract their inane claims.</p>

<p>The cornerstone of an open standard, no matter who defines it, is the use of terms like "reasonable and non-discriminatory" (RAND) licensing and document availability, or "open to all". These are not confusing concepts.</p>

<p>http://perens.com/OpenStandards/Definition.html</p>

<p>http://www.csrstds.com/openstds.html</p>

[godfrey]

Please don't lecture me: I'm not Olympus marketing.

 

 

I didn't say "open standard". I said "open to be licensed", which means 'available at the discretion of the owners', nothing

else.

[david_ngo]

<p>Micro Four Thirds has never been claimed to be an open standard. When Micro Four Thirds was announced, it was stated clearly to be a closed standard restricted to Panasonic and Olympus. Only Four Thirds is claimed to be open. Micro Four Thirds also has a different interface than Four Thirds.</p>

[joseph_wisniewski]

<p>Godfrey, don't take this personally, but you hav no right to criticize. Your basic communication style is lecturing people.</p>

<p>David, I'm quite aware that uFT isn't four thirds. However, uFT can use all four thirds lenses. The interface is backwards compatible. There's no protocol translation in the adapter.</p>

[godfrey]

<p>If you don't want me to take things personally, Joseph, it would be wise not to make stupid and insulting statements like that. </p>

<p>I'll just unsubscribe from this thread now as I'm not interested in hearing your reply and the original question posed in this thread is long since done. </p>