vivek iyer

<p>The cheapest of the m4/3rds (G1) is still the best in terms of what it offers (the best EVF, the most useful TFT screen) for still photography. Nothing else comes even close to being a competitor.</p>

<p>Given that all others (EP-1&2 and GF-1) are over priced with lesser features, the choice should be obvious.</p>

<p><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2691/4083231851_4ef9ba85c9_o.jpg" alt="" width="525" height="700" /><br>

<em>Rained out. Austrian tourism promotion. The Hague, 7Nov'09</em></p>

<p><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3511/4060974029_fe7010537a_o.jpg" alt="" width="525" height="700" /><br>

Nice opening, Carey.</p>

<p>Tariq, I have the combinations you list. It is just too heavy and not that useful, in my view.</p>

<p>Don't say good bye to your Linhof or medium format. </p>

<p>With the ultra mini sensor, your movements have to be ultra precise and ultra small compared to your Linhof, making it practically useless.</p>

<p><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2794/4035271697_81595faa70_o.jpg" alt="" width="600" height="800" /><br>

<em>UV induced visible light fluorescence </em> (G1 and Oly-D 14-42).</p>

<p>Tethered operation is not available.</p>

<p>But, there is a better option.</p>

<p>Buy a G1 which is <strong>cheaper and more versatile</strong> . </p>

<p>Use the articulating TFT screen for your purpose.</p>

<p>I like "Rockwell" better.</p>

<p>1. Perhaps makes more money.<br>

2. Not a soothsayer.<br>

3. Not a fanboy/follower of one brand.<br>

4. Funny with little substance.<br>

5. Can not possibly have any insider information from any brand. ;-)</p>

<p>That is <em>Myristica fragrans.</em><br>

The red part is Mace and the nut is Nutmeg. Commonly used spices.</p>

<blockquote>

<p ><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=4581187">Yoshio Tanaka</a> , Oct 10, 2009; 05:42 a.m.</p>

<p>The G1 is now slightly more expensive than when it was released..</p>

</blockquote>

<p>In Europe, it (the kit) was ~650 Euros on debut. It was at its lowest last month with cash back offers (ranging from 100 to 125 Euros) from Pana that made it ~425 Euros. Now, it is in that ball park without the cash back.</p>

<p>I think part of the reason was Pana did not know how the camera would be received and priced it (by their rates) cheaply.</p>

<p>On the Pana lenses, in general, they are the best, fully compatible lenses for this system, in terms of build quality and optical performance. No doubt about it.</p>

<p>Having said that, I do not like the AF as it is implemented in the m4/3rds at all. I continue to use manual focus lenses which perform to my satisfaction.</p>

<p>I have to agree with Godfrey says. If a lens would not be useful to you, it does not matter how high or low its cash value is.</p>

<p>The best lens is what you have and use the most.</p>

<p>For me it is a 5 Euro Computar-TV 25/1.3 lens (in this focal length range) and it is worth a lot more than the latest Pana lens.</p>

<p>There was major dip (prices/demand) due to some uninformed people claiming the lens to be a "dog".</p>

<p>The screw mount version (converted with RF coupling) does exist (I have seen one) but is rare and is pricier because of the rarity. </p>

<p>A FED2, properly aligned, should handle it if the size of the lens would not block the view/rangefinder ports.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>And what do you think about adapters that adapt manual lenses and could have a mechanism that opens and closes the aperture after you have entered the Max f-stop.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That isn't necessary for the m4/3rds. At least with the G1, with its, impressive EVF/TFT displays, you can accurately focus stopped down.</p>

<p>This opening/closing issues are only for mirror reflex cams. Not terribly important for the mirrorless cams.<br>

I also strongly believe that once Sony, Nikon etc enter the fray, the m4/3rds cams will look like toy cams.</p>

<p>AFAIK, only a Canon EOS to Contax N (defunct and no legal issues that Tommy pointed out) adapter has ever been made that would permit everything.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>David,</p>

<p>Dprevs appear to have changed the "test results".</p>

<p>http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/widget/Fullscreen.ashx?reviews=59,62&fullscreen=true&av=5,5&fl=17,20&vis=VisualiserSharpnessMTF,VisualiserSharpnessMTF&stack=horizontal&&config=LensReviewConfiguration.xml%3F2</p>

<p>Here the f/1.8 results (center) was above 1800 (they had f/1.7 as well). Still, at some apertures (stopped down) it does show that. May be they will tweak it further to bring it down?!</p>