larry_kincaid2

<p>My turn for somewhat silly questions. But ignorance is ignorance by any name. I want to try one of the small Pan F lenses on my Panasonic Lumix G1. First question is where can I obtain an adapter for this purpose? Vivek has shared a lot of information about this issue, but it's still not clear what I should use. He implies the the mount for the G1 and the Pan F cameras are "almost" identical, but a small extender of sorts is still needed. Should I pursue this approach or wait until an actual adapter for the Pen F is available? Gandy says on his web site that: "<strong>In time there will be future adapters for previously digital inadaptable lenses such as Olympus Pen F and Konica Autoreflex lenses, not to mention most other popular 35mm SLRs.</strong> " So, apparently he may receive Pan F adapters at some point. <br>

Second, it's not clear what focal length I'd end up with on the G1 with Pan F lenses. They are already made for half-frame film, same size as the G1 sensor. So, does that imply that the focal lengh would be the same as for the Pan F? For example, the Pan F 25mm F2.8 lens is listed as equivalent to a 35mm film camera lens. So, if I used this lens on the G1, would I expect to have the equivent of the same 25mm focal length, the equivalent of its 35mm film lens, or 35mm, or finally the doubling of the focal length to either a 50mm or 70mm lens on the G1? </p>

<p>May the sensor get better and better, and the EVF brighter and clearer as time goes by. I still want to try my lonely Nikon 180mm lens on the G1, and see how good my 360mm lens will work . . . and weigh, of course. One of the best lenses Nikon ever made. </p>

<p>May the sensor get better and better, and the EVF brighter and clearer as time goes by. I still want to try my lonely Nikon 180mm lens on the G1, and see how good my 360mm lens will work . . . and weigh, of course. One of the best lenses Nikon ever made. </p>

<p>The winner and the sore loser. Galapagos frigates during the mating season last April. </p><div></div>

<p>This kind of question always reminds me of Mark Twain's experience in San Francisco when he was young and unknown. He wanted to write articles for the San Francisco Chronical, but they weren't interested in hiring anyone. So, he wrote an interesting essay and sent it to them to use for "free" if they wanted to. Of course they published it. Pretty soon the paper was getting lots of letters from the readers asking for more of his articles. So, they eventually had to start paying him. This is somewhat similar to the free internship for beginners. Work your way into an indispensable position and you'll get hired. Think of it from the hirer's point of view: why would they take a risk on you with money up front without knowing what you can do? So, do it for free and show them something. Finally, as suggested above, show someone something they've never seen before or never even thought of . . . that just has to be used and shared with others. Out of pocket costs . . . that's a different question, especially travel. Digital equipment helps a little bit with that if you already have a computer, printer, and software. </p>

<p>I don't think it's backward at all to buy a G1 in order to make use of Leica lenses, or other lenses for that matter. That's one of the strengths of the 4/3 system, adapatability to other lenses. If someone cannot afford a $5,000 Leica digital M8 camera, but can afford the $600 of the G1, then why not spend another $600-$1200 to buy a used Leica M lens or a less expensive R lens? In that situation, I could not see buying a new $6,000 Leica M 24mm summilux. The nice thing about Leica lenses is that they last a long time. I just bought a 50mm rigid summicron from about 1965, that works very well on the G1, if you don't mind it cropped to 100mm. Then there's the 25mm Cosina lense that's under $400 new that's small and would fit the G1 quite well as a standard 50mm lens. The depth of field would be quite good with that lens so that manual focusing in many situations would not be necessary. The key issue is: is the sensor on the G1 good enough to justify using a high quality Leica M lens? Secondly, do you really like using the G1 as a camera in and of itself. Remember, you still get to use the kit zoom lens that comes with it. So, if there's a group of people who are considering this for all of these reasons, then those who are able to test Leica M and R lenses (or Nikon, Canon, etc.) on the G1 should be sharing their experiences on forums like this one. They should not be comparing the G1 and Leica M8 with Leica lenses. The Leica M8 would win in every situation except one: long lenses such as the 90mm or longer that are not as suitable on the M8 because of focusing issues. The zoom focus in the electronic view finder of the G1 works quite well in my experience. </p>

<p>I used zip lock bags on my Leica M8 while in Viet Nam to prevent condensation moving in and out of air conditioned hotels and cars. Never had a problem. Someone here once suggested using women's shower caps when it rains. I actually brought back a couple of hotel shower caps with me from Viet Nam this years and then actually used one in the Galapagos Islands during a brief drizzle (not a tropical downpour). The shower cap entirely covered the M8. In a pinch. In a real rain I suspect the rain sleevewwould be better, but the shower caps are free and take up no space. Humidity is outrageous in Viet Nam. Seriously consider investing in UnderArmor type shirts, shorts/slacks, and even underwear. The problem with such humidity is that once wet, the air is too humid to let you dry out. The only worse place for humidity I've experienced was the Atitlan jungle in Guatemala. In the morning coming in there was a spot of pavement with a very shallow puddle of water . . . it was still there on the way out in the afternoon, sunshine all day. And yes, I came out wet as well. But I loved it. And Viet Nam is a great place to visit. The Vietnamese will tell you that the best weather for a visit is in November. P.S. You take the zip lock bags off as soon as the temperature equalizes, so I don't see what the worry would be about moister being trapped inside the bag. Once out back in the hotel you can wipe off the camera and let it dry out. </p>

<p>Here's a crop that you might actually be interested in using. Not just to test the lens or image, so to speak. </p><div></div>

<p>Yes, the shiny spider thread is still visible. I checked it to make sure it was shot at 100 ISO. Here's the full image of a couple with their dogs across the lake a bit. </p><div></div>

<p>I've tried some of my Leica M lenses on my new Panasonic G1 (2x crop). I prefer the quality of the image produced by the M8 with Leica lenses, especially when using 24mm to 50mm lenses. Recently, I experimented at a nearby lake with my 75mm f1.4 Summilux. Reid's review made the point that the G1 might be more useful for telephoto lenses than wide angle lenses. So, I checked it out. I did not try to take comparative shots with the M8 of the same scenes. Not sure what the point would be. But with the 2x crop factor the 75mm lens "acts like" a 150mm lens. But what kind of image does it produce? I'll attach a series of 3 images for your own evaluation. I'll only say that it was useful to be able to use the zoom feature in the electronic live rangefinder when focusing the 75mm lens on flowers, frogs, birds, etc. First, a limb with flowers on each end. Notice the bokeh and color. (Process as a jpg in Capture 4.7. </p><div></div>

<p>Now a section of the surf from the same photo, 2 inches wide and 600 pxls wide, not sharpened. </p><div></div>

<p>"A cropped picture from a 50mm lens on an M8 won't get you far shooting game in Africa — you need an EFOV of 400-500mm." Mitch, you seemed to have missed my point. No one that I know of has ever suggested that a M8 with 50mm lens could ever substitute in a situation that requires a DSLR with a 400-500mm lens. Surely, that's not what you're trying to say by comparing the use of your M8 and Nikon D300. This kind of comparison has been dismissed many times here; same goes for macro photography. I just used a 90-400mm zoom lens and M8 with 50mm lens to shoot wildlife in the Galapagos Islands. Granted, no leopards at 100 yards in a tree. But as I discovered in Kenya, the jeeps can often get too close to many animals to use a telephoto lens, suggesting that the M8 50-90mm lens would work just fine in many situations. What I was saying is that the image of the M8 with a 50mm lens is far superior to the image created by the 400mm telephoto lens, to the point where a substantial crop of the M8 image is almost as good if not better than the zoom lens. It also opens up to 2.0 or 1.4. Since the uncropped b&w image I posted didn't seem to illustrate this point, I'll upload two crops from the same image shown above, but in color. Each one is listed as 2 inches across or 600pxls. First, the frigate in the air, then the surf. Again, I'm not suggesting that a 50mm lens be used when a 500mm lens is required, only that the image of the M8 sensor with a high quality Leica lens has a superior enough resolution to be cropped. As a matter of fact, both the D300 and the M8 crop the image of all their lenses. </p><div></div>

<p>My M8 switch works fine; never turns on or off by itself. My 24mm lens is not coded, nor my 35mm Lux or 50mm lux; never noticed any problem with any of them, even with skies. My 28mm lens is coded; never noticed the effect of coding on these either. I always start shooting a a minus 2/3 to adjust for highlight over exposure, and then adjust the metering depending on the initial histograms or simply they way it looks. Then just shoot away. What I have noticed "absolutely" is that the resolution of the Leica lenses allows for substantial cropping without loss of resolution, surpassing the image produced by the zoom lens on my new Panasonic G1. When you try to crop one of the zoomed images, you lose resolution immediately. This means you can use the 50mm Lux or now my 50mm rigid summicron (very very sharp) and then crop it to obtain something that would normally require a telephoto or zoom lens. Keep in mind, the dpreview said the following about the G1 image quality: "In good light it produces consistently high image quality out of the box, . . . At the camera's standard JPEG settings G1 images show natural tones and colors and hardly any artifacts. Image detail is impressive indeed." DPREVIEW gave the same numerical ratings as the new Nikon D90: image quality 8.5, perfomance 9.0, and value, 8.5. I assume that your D300 was rated higher, but it cannot be rated much higher. And yet, as I said, when I examined my images from the Galapagos Islands, the Leica 8, rigid cron images were substantially better than those made with the G1. Both are light cameras, by the way, so I was actually able to walk around with one in each hand and switch back and forth with little trouble (keeping the G1 on automatic pilot most of the time). So, we're back to the Leica lenses and sensor again: what about those? </p><div></div>

<p>Then don't put it in the image area! Put a white border/mat around the photo and then place the signature in that area, just like Ansel Adams did it with his pencil. </p>

<p>I just came back from an 8 day trip to the Galapagos two weeks ago. We took rain gear just in case, but only had one afternoon with a mild drizzle that disappeared after half an hour. Lucky. You could get real rain right now, I suppose. Check the weather report (google "Galapagos weather") before you leave. I kept my two cameras and lenses in zip lock bags while moving in and out of the air conditioned boat into the humid hot outdoors (about 85 F). I assumed that if I dropped my camera back into the surf that I might still be able to recover the camera equipment completely dry if the bag itself did not stay underwater very long. This never happened, of course, not even close. Every boat to surf (1-2 feet deep, sand underneath) or boat to dry land was assisted by those who drove the boat or the guide. I handed the camera bag (backpack with water, cameras, etc.) over to someone on the ground, stepped onto the ground, then the bag was handed back to me. As I got used to this, it became just as easy to keep the backpack on my back and make it to shore that way. I suppose an accident could happen, but it's not likely. Humidity worried me the most. Take backup ziplock bags, not the zippered kind but the ones that seal all the way (after getting most of the air out. What I did use when it drizzled a bit was the clear plastic shower cap that I "borrowed" from a hotel I stayed at the week before. Someone on photo.net recommended this. It fit perfectly over my entire camera while walking around with the camera out, and kept it perfectly dry. I even took one shot thru the shower cap just to see what it would look like. The shower cap is meant to be a quick temporary protection, not one you'd keep on during a rainstorm all day. These are simple solutions that should take care of everything. [The camera/laptop backpacks are water resistent, not proof, but with cameras inside within ziplock bags I don't think I'd worry about it much.] </p>

<p>Panasonic Lumix cameras seem to be getting better and better every year. I have the first TZ1. My wife took beautiful photos with it two weeks ago in the Galapagos. The 380mm or so zoom feature was quite useful for wildlife. The new TZ7 is expected to be an improvement over the award winning TZ5. The new one goes from 25 to 400mm. If it were me, I'd wait until the TZ7 is available. If I had an immediate need, such as a trip, I'd probably buy the TZ5. The range of the lens is quite useful for a carry-around, pocket camera. </p>

<p>Panasonic Lumix cameras seem to be getting better and better every year. I have the first TZ1. My wife took beautiful photos with it two weeks ago in the Galapagos. The 380mm or so zoom feature was quite useful for wildlife. The new TZ7 is expected to be an improvement over the award winning TZ5. The new one goes from 25 to 400mm. If it were me, I'd wait until the TZ7 is available. If I had an immediate need, such as a trip, I'd probably buy the TZ5. The range of the lens is quite useful for a carry-around, pocket camera. </p>

<p>I just tried out my new G1 in the Galapagos Islands as a companion to my M8 (with only the 28 asph and 50mm "old" rigid summicron lenses). I wanted telephoto capacity up to 400mm (2x200), so I bought the 45-200mm zoom lense as well. I also took along the Leica M lens adapter to be able to use my Leica lenses (at the equiv. of 58mm and 100mm) if necessary. My wife used the Pan Lumix Z1, which has a great lens but only the LCD screen on the back for framing, etc. This type of camera is lousy under any conditions that involve outdoor sun! She struggled with composition and flew blind a lot, but may of her images were superb. <br>

I agreed with Reid's review of the G1 from the beginning that it it's strength (with the M cameras) is it's telephoto capacity and high quality image. DP review, for example, rated the G1 image quality and overall quality the same as the new Nikon D90. I was waiting to buy the D90 or D700 to use my old AF Nikon lenses, but balked totally when I picked them both up at Ritz. Tanks. I'm just not used to the size and weight of these new DSLRs. So, I bit the bullet and bought the G1 instead for its quality, weight, and backup for the M8. The kit lens that came with the G1 was evaluated quite highly. Can we assume that Leica designed it? Finally, as you all may know, Leica is bringing out its own zoom lens for the G1 sometime this year for around $1000, so it better be a great lens. My whole 2-lens G1 kit "only" cost about $1000, so it's definitely worth the money.<br>

So, for the first time I carried an M8 with two lenses and the G1 with two lenses. In the Galapagos I finally ended up walking with both cameras around my neck at the same time, the M8 with the 50mm rigid (real 50mm) and the G1 with the equivalent of the 90-400 zoom lens. These worked well as a perfect combination for shooting wildlife and scenics in the Galapagos. I ended up holding one camera in each hand as I walked, as if I were carrying grapefruit, for balance and to protect them from banging each other. The combined weight did not bother me at all, nor the empty backpack on my back (actually side to minimize the heat and humidity). So, I liked using them both at the same time.<br>

In a nutshell, I think you should buy the G1 for itself, for the features and high quality that it offers. I noticed in the airport coming back that Pop Photo magazine awarded t the G1 as "camera of the year," partly for its breakthrough electronic viewfinder but also for its overall quality. I agree with the idea of putting a wide angle on the G1 and setting it for maximum depth of field to avoid focusuing altogether. Focusing the M lens manually on the G1 is easy, as suggested above. I would have no hesitation to using the M lenses on the G1, but frankly you'd have to have a good reason not to use the lenses that come with the G1 and have all the electronic capacity that comes with the camera. <br>

Needless to say, I love the images the M8 with the rigid summicron produced in the Galapagos, as well as the 28mm asph (which I eventually quit using because the silly animals let you walk to within three feet of them, even birds sitting on an egg! Neither birds, iquana, nor fish run away from you. Go figure. Great for photos. <br>

I have duplicate photos (more or less) from the M8 and the G1, but I have not run all the raw files thru photoshop yet. So, I cannot fairly compare the two outputs yet. Leica images come first. I suspect that the telephoto images of the G1 will be great and not directly comparable to the M8 50mm images anyway. But this is what I said at the beginning. We should be considering these as cameras with different strengths, but also as one that serves as a backup for the M8. So far, I have never needed a backup for the M8, including three hot humid trips to Cambodia, Vietnam, and Galapagos. I'll share images from both cameras when they're ready. </p><div></div>

<p>Since no one has mentioned it yet, I will. Leica lenses are not "normal" lenses in the sense that they do not lose value, and in the case of all of the lenses that I bought "used" or formerly owned in like new condition (to me), the prices have gone up substantially. That means I can easily sell any of them for no loss whatsoever, and in some cases for profit. This takes the sting out of trying out a lens, in this case "after buying it." As said above, you can find good used summicron for a good price. Use it exclusively for a while until you get used to it. Then decide if you want to keep it or not. Become a 2-lens photographer rather than a one lens one. But everyone will warn you that even if you still favor the 35mm most of the time, it's always very hard to sell any Leica lens once you own it. The argument I made above works in reverse: if the prices may be going up and you want to use it some of the time for specific purposes, then why sell it at all. It's a good investment, certainly better than the stock market right now. I don't think two lenses is extravagant. So, search the used lens sites (this forum and others, KEH, Photo Village, even Kevin Cameras for a vintage 50mm in great shape), and if you see a good price, go for it. You won't regret it. This will not stop you from wonding if you should then go 35/50/and 75 or 90. Nothing puts a break on those thoughts. </p><div></div>

<p>My understanding is that the lenses for the G1 are designed by Leica and built by Panasonic (somewhere!). Well, I just double checked the B&H site where I stumbled across the longer lens for the G1. If you just search for the G1 cameras, you only get the kit lens discussed above. Search for "Panasonic Lenses" and go to the bottom of the list. Since I found it, I bought it along with the whole kit. The longer lens described below is only $325 and I assume it has about the same quality as the kit lens. <br>

The blurb clearly says that the lens was developed by Leica for Panasonic. If you look at its construction, it's hard to see how Panasonic could have designed it. It's not a simple design. I totally accepted Reid's conclusion in his full review of the G1 that it would be a great addition to the Leica RF system for its telephoto capacity (200 translates into 400 mm in film terms, which is about right for wild life). Add the capacity to use Leica M lenses as a backup and I was sold. Not to mention that the 2-lens kit is less than any new M lens. I'm about to take a 10-day trip to the Galapgos Islands. Coincidentally, if you go to the TRAVEL forum on photo.net right now there's a whole thread on what to take to the Galapagos by guys who just returned. Wide to normal range for creatures that just walk right up to you (Leica M8) and "perhaps" a telephoto zoom for wildlife/birds "when you are not allowed to leave the required paths." So, I bit the bullet, so to speak. Now you're telling me the kit lens got a 5 rating for quality. What a nice way to help me over my buyer's remorse. <br>

I should add that I've been waiting 2-3 years (post Leica purchase) to get a decent Nikon digital so I could use my favorite Nikon 180mm f2.8 telephoto lens again. As soon as I picked up the D700 and D90 (there's nothing left to wait for?), I knew I'd never buy one. Tanks. Just too heavy to carry around even without the lenses. Using the M6 and M8 has totally ruined me for any kind of large SLR digital camera. Then I compared the weight of the lenses. The beauty of the Nikon 180mm is that it's <strong>small</strong> compared to similar Nikon long zooms. It's "only" 5.7" long and weighs 1.7 lbs. The Panasonic G1 telezoom below is 4" long and weighs just 13.4 oz. One goes (180) to 270mm on the D90, while the Panasonic G1 lens goes to 400mm. Which one would you be most likely to carry? So, the Nikon 180mm goes now my son for his D40. He's already discovered that autofocus is not all that great. Very hard for me to give up without a nice replacement. <br>

So, given all the fuss and initial high sales of the G1 and now the new Lumix TZ7 that goes 25-400 and fits in your pocket, is there anyone here who still thinks Leica does not know what it's doing? How about a red or blue camera? They were also sold out along with the black ones at B&H until last Sunday. So, who's buying blue and red? Start scanning the crowds; they'll be easier to spot that Ann Curry with her M8 in Dafur. <br>

Here's the description of the second lens: The <strong>Panasonic 45-200mm f/4-5.6 G Vario MEGA O.I.S. Lens</strong> is an interchangeable long telephoto zoom lens, <strong>developed by Leica</strong> exclusively for digital SLR cameras. It follows the ultra-compact Micro Four Thirds Standard, which also makes it compatible with other brands that use this same format. The focal length of this lens is equivalent to approx. 90-400mm in 35mm format terms. By incorporating the MEGA O.I.S. (Optical Image Stabilizer) feature and 3 ED elements, this lens makes it possible to capture clear, sharp images, edge to edge, even in macro shooting or low-lit situations. This provides users with a wide range of shooting flexibility.</p>

<dl><dt>Three ED (extra-low dispersion) elements help the lens meet Leica's extremely high optical performance standards. They help capture images that are clear from corner to corner across the entire zoom range, with minimal distortion. Multi-coated lens elements reduce ghosting and flare to an absolute minimum, enabling the lens to deliver an optical performance that meets Leica's lofty standards. 7-blade circular aperture diaphragm produces pleasant out-of-focus characteristics. </dt><dt> </dt></dl>

<p>Check out B&H. Seems like I just saw refurbished D40s in the $400s. </p>

<p>Now you have to explain it to both of your wives.</p>

<p>Scot: Would you please elaborate on "sleep alone"? I have tried, but I cannot think of any reason for sleeping alone at high altitudes. How far away does the next person have to be for it to qualify as "alone"?</p>

<p>Take a couple of ziplock plastic bags to seal your camera in (even inside another camera bag) when going in and out of a cold, dry airconditioned hotel or car. The humidy is extremely high, so condensation can be instantaneous. Once the temperature has equalized, then you can take it out. I agree with Mike, less weight is best in such high heat and humidity. I was there last March (Viet Nam and Siem Reap. <br>

Mike: my wife picked me up a very nice black leather digicam case in the Itae Won shopping area of Seoul a couple of years ago at a very low price. It's rectangular in a shape to fit a video camara, but when compartmentalized it's the perfect size for once Leica camera with lens attached and a second lens on the other end. I've traveled with a third lens in the case, but after a while the weight is too much. In fact, after two whiles, I usually just cary the camera with one lens. Outer compartments work for accessories. It's very light and does not look like a camera bag. I've never seen an all leather video camera case in the US. Have you ever seen one in Korea or perhaps the shopping area of Bangkok? Or have these all disappeared too? </p>

<p>Perhaps because Ken Rockwell is "new" to the Leica film system and has been totally immersed in digital SLR, he's discovering most of the important qualities that people on this forum have been taking for granted and rarely mention. I finally got to handle the new Nikon D90 and D700 at Ritz last weekend. I've been waiting for these for some time and hoping that they would finally give me a way to rescue my beautiful telephoto Nikon AF lenses, especially my 180mm lens. Leica, of course, is not designed for such lenses. I cannot tell you how shocked I was to pick up the long awaited full frame D700. It is a total tank of a camera. And I mean tank. The job calls for a precise sniper's rifle and they give you a tank instead. It seemed like it must have weighed at least 10 pounds. And giganic in my hands (now always compared to the M6 or M8). What a disappointment. How did digital SLRs grow so big and why? There's no way I could possibly buy one of those now for any price. <br>

Many of us came to age in photography with Pentax spotmatics and the comparable Nikon SLRs of the same era. For us, this defined what the size of a "normal' camera should be. Lighter P&S cameras came later, but they were for snapshots. In sum, no camera should be or should need to be larger than this. As Ken Rockwell says, you just feel like walking further with a Leica film camera--and that was supposed to be the whole idea behind landscape or nature photography. And no tripod? How could that be? [View cameras and medium format cameras aside, of course]<br>

After using my M8 for some time, I shot a couple of roles of film in my M6 ttl recently. What a nice experience it was. As much as I like the M8 and what it does, the M6 just felt better in my hands, and I quickly fell back into the old habits. I would continue with it except for one thing: the film. I disliked more than ever the now ordeal of processing the film. The XP2 was simply not processed correctly; the color film looked horrible in the paid for scans, but I was able to convert it with some work into decent B&W. But alas, it was all too much trouble, not to mention the $12-18 bucks a role. The M8 is the best answer to this problem: a M6 with slightly more room for the digital back and chips. Instant review with a histogram, and so forth. We could not have asked for anything more the first time out. Hopefully, no future versions will grow any larger than the M8 and hopefully will shrink back to the size of the M6. Why not? This is what a camera is supposed to look and feel like. </p>