upgrading my old panasonic GF1

[nico_bouchi]

<p>Hi photo.net,</p>

<p>I'm know interested for upgrading my old panasonic GF1, at the same time, I have always been waiting to buy a reel reflex full frame like Canon 5Dmk2. I know it's quite different, I was first was on analogic reflex (Pentax KX, Om 2...), then one of the first reflex numeric canon 450d, and then I've been waiting a while to finaly switch for a less expensive than Canon 5D, it was the panasonic GF1... I must admit it's very pleasant to not having to carry a very big bag with my GF1, I can even put it in my pocket for a good result not as much as 5d but not so far as it's just a hobby for me.</p>

<p>First of all what I like is shooting street and paysage, I'm actually not very good and also I don't like so much making portrait. The most important for me is having bright lenses, with very good Color depth, a wide dynamic range, and a very good image quality overall. My favorite gems will be a wide angle (something around 35mm).</p>

<p>Wich one will you recommand among :</p>

 

<p ><a href="http://www.dpreview.com/products/canon/slrs/canon_eos5dmkii">Canon EOS 5D Mark II</a></p>

<p ><a href="http://www.dpreview.com/products/pentax/slrs/pentax_k5">Pentax K-5</a></p>

<p ><a href="http://www.dpreview.com/products/fujifilm/slrs/fujifilm_xpro1">Fujifilm X-Pro1</a></p>

<p ><a href="http://www.dpreview.com/products/samsung/slrs/samsung_nx200">Samsung NX200</a></p>

<p ><a href="http://www.dpreview.com/products/olympus/slrs/oly_em5">Olympus OM-D E-M5</a></p>

<p >I've been eliminating Sony NEX 7 cause lens for this one are to big and too few but maybe it's a good competitor too ?</p>

<p >Do you think it will be better waiting for a reel mirrorless full frame ? It's alla around the same price, if I was buying a Canon MK2 will be on a second hand market. My budget is around $1000 and $1500. I'm also interested in HDR option, and 1080p could be a great option as my wife is a documentalist movie maker (it can be helpful sometime). I own some Voigtlander and Leica could be cool if I can find something to mount them.</p>

<p > </p>

[nico_bouchi]

<p>I forgot to mention that a true 100% view finder will be far better than my actual screen. I don't really care about high ISO, and big bunch of option like 3D doesn't matter...</p>

[ariel_s1]

<p>You state you're "not very good." What do you mean by this? Perhaps share some photos with your GF1? Your upgrade path could be something as simple as the Olympus 17mm f/2.8 lens for your camera, and problem solved! I have a G2 which has the same sensor as your GF1, and I'm pretty happy with its output. Most people that think they need full frame don't really need it. Look at these examples from the flickr GF1 pool, and if you aren't getting these results, the the problem is with you, not your camera:<br>

http://www.flickr.com/groups/dmc-gf1/pool/<br>

Since the G1, G2, GF2, GF3, and all Olympus PEN cameras share the same sensor and have near-identical output, you can also feel free to look at the pools for those cameras and see other examples of output.</p>

<p>Of course, I don't have any false ideas about my camera being equal to a Canon 5D with 35mm lens, but given the huge portability advantage that we have, plus the $4,000 cost savings, you won't hear a peep out of me. I try to tell people that it's almost never worth it for them to make the jump from one camera system to another, and I'd wager good money that it holds true in this case as well. Plus, if you get a larger camera, it won't fit in your pocket, and it will be harder to do street shooting with a large camera, because people tend to notice a huge piece of glass pointed at their faces. The Olympus 17mm isn't the best lens in the world, but it does the job better than nothing. The E-M5 produces the same images as the Panasonic G3 and GX1, which are much cheaper for the money, and the GH2 produces slightly better photos, and in addition it has the native sensor to alter your aspect ratio without cropping the image. All in all, you really have to think about what you have now, what you think you're missing, and what your budget is.</p>

[jcuknz]

<p>If you are used to the G1 I think there is a distinct likelihood that you will not like a DSLR and I'd suggest you wait for the future Olympus or Panasonic M4/3 offerings. Personally I would consider a DSLR as a step down. It may have a bigger sensor, the reason I went from bridge to M4/3, but weight is a serious consideration and bulkiness. The bigger the sensor the bigger and heavier the glass. Changing lenses is a grossly over stressed aspect :-) <br>

So many people write about their delight with smaller cameras and leaving their DSLRs at home :-)<br>

My G3 and 14-140 lens is similar to my bridge camera and about the same weight and size and goes almost everywhere with me. My DSLR remains unused this past six month and more.</p>

[nico_bouchi]

<p>what I really miss is a good viewfinder to use manual focus with my older lenses... maybe buying a view finder could be an option ? and some time when there's a lot of contrast the dynamic range is very short.<br>

I'haven't said that the GF1 is a bad camera.<br>

I agree for what you've been telling about DSLRs... But I think I could find something in between maybe I've got to wait more...<br>

Thanks for your comments.<br>

Any recommendations about lenses in this case ? I own a 20mm f/1.7 and a voigtlander quite similar 35mm f/1.7 hard to focus with only the screen, but I've been making great pictures with it. Maybe the 14-40mm is a good option.<br>

I think 17mm (equivalent 34 mm), is too close from the 20mm (equivalent 40 mm), I don't think it will make a big change a bit like my 35mm (equivalent 70mm). Maybe 70mm is also not a good option.</p>

[nico_bouchi]

<p>maybe the 14mm f2.5 lens is a better issue ? wich old leica will you recomand for this camera ?</p>

[andylynn]

<p>If all you want is a better finder, wait a bit and see how you like the OM-D. At least that way you don't need new lenses. Also, I think that for somebody who likes manual focusing, older SLR lenses with adapters is a <em>great</em> idea. It frees you from being locked into one system. If next time you're looking for a camera, you prefer whatever Sony's got, all you need is a new $20 adapter and you've gone from M4/3 lenses to NEX lenses!</p>

[nico_bouchi]

<p>Not as great on a Lumix DMC-GF1for manual focusing.<br>

It's look like better on a sony NEX cause you've got "focus peaking" might be very helpful when you don't have a view finder : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfYhkZkNAyI.</p>

<p>Anyway it seem's there's interesting new lenses on Olympus that I never heard before :<br>

- OLYMPUS 09-18mm EZ F/4.0-5.6 (18/36mm)<br>

- OLYMPUS 12mm F/2 (24mm)<br>

as well great panasonic :<br>

- PANASONIC LUMIX G X VARIO 14-42MM F/3.5-5.6 (28/84 mm)</p>

<h2> </h2>

[ariel_s1]

<p>So what I'm getting is that you're currently happy with the GF1 and 20mm overall, but you'd like a viewfinder for manual focus capabilities for some of your older lenses, plus improved sensor performance. The GF1 doesn't really have a very good add-on viewfinder. If you want to stay with m4/3, the Pansonic G3 has a built-in viewfinder and is noticeably cheaper than the E-M5, but it produces identical images because it has a nearly identical sensor. The GX1 has the same sensor as well (which is basically the new-sensor version of your GF1), but once you add a viewfinder it starts to be as expensive as the GH2 or E-M5.</p>

<p>The 14-140mm is not that great of a lens. It is large, rather expensive, and doesn't give near as good image quality as your 20mm or other lenses. There have been sharpness issues with the Panasonic X 14-42mm lens as well. Really, the image quality advantage is only there with Panasonic if you buy quality lenses. The 14mm is rather disappointing as well, and so is the 17mm that I mentioned above. If you want or need that focal length, then you buy it because that's what you have, but be aware that they are rather mediocre lenses optically. The 9-18mm is a great ultra wide angle lens, but realize that it's only f/5.6 at 18mm, so it may limit your creative capability. The 12mm is a great lens, but realize that it's on the border of ultrawide, and it is rather expensive. Or, if you're willing to buy another lens to replace your Voigtlander, the Olympus 45mm is an absolute dream of a lens, and it is relatively cheap. If I were to be given my dream lens setup for my G2, it would be:<br>

-Panasonic 7-14mm f/4<br>

-Olympus 12mm f/2<br>

-Panasonic 25mm f/1.4<br>

-Olympus 45mm f/1.8<br>

-Panasonic 100-300mm lens for wildlife<br>

Realistically, I will probably buy the 45mm soon enough, and in a little bit of time I will buy the Panasonic 25mm as well.</p>

<p>I am also going to recommend another outlet, if you're up for it: consider a NEX-5n and the add-on viewfinder, or a NEX-7. Here is the current roadmap:<br>

http://2.s.img-dpreview.com/files/news/1477505005/Roadmap.jpg?v=1388<br>

Sony decided to not make the 24mm lens a pancake, because they chose optical quality over other features. Plus, the NEX cameras all have a feature called focus peaking for manual focus lenses, which makes them far superior for manual focus lenses, compared to the Panasonic and Olympus cameras. Actually, with peaking, you may not even need a built-in viewfinder for manual focus! Plus, the larger sensors are also more advanced, and they have noticeably better dynamic range. The cameras are also smaller than the Olympus and Panasonic cameras.</p>

[jcuknz]

<p><em>The 14-140mm is not that great of a lens. It is large, rather expensive, and doesn't give near as good image quality as your 20mm or other lenses</em><br>

How on earth one compares a 14-140 zoom with a 20 is quite beyond me. What slight drop in performance is more than made up by the convienience of the zoom. But we all have different attitudes and I have not noticed any deficiencies to make me question my choice. Still I'm glad there are these purists around since one must have dumped his 14-140 so I could buy it s/h :-)</p>