Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-11-2009, 07:02 AM   #16
Inactive Account




Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Rochester, NY
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 119
An addition, but not ready to replace

Great to see that i'm not the only one that's considering a MFT as a small travel solution. I usually take my camera on multi day hikes and I must say that the K20with a complement of lenses sucks up valuable real estate plus weight. Mind you I could just packa few pancakes and take the trouble of switching out lenses as required, but sometimes a zoom is nice.

I'd like to see a PK to MFT adapter that at least brings over aperture control so I don't have to switch out all my DA limiteds to FA limiteds. Not to mention that the PK adapter seems to command a considerable premium over the C* and N* ones.

I'm certainly keeping a close eye on this though as it might be a very compelling reason to move a pana and keep some of my pentax glass and swtich out my primary rig to something more along the lines of a D300 or D700 for more serious work...

It'll be interesting to see where things go by next PMA - especially with Hoya stating they need a new alliance. I'd love to see something like a Fuji sensor in a K-7 body. and of course continued improvement in the AF area. Time will tell...

09-11-2009, 11:16 AM   #17
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Scotland
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 348
Original Poster
there is a pentax adaptor with aperture control, so you could use your da limiteds.

The more i think about this the more i want to do it, but there are also times when im going about with the d3 that i wish it was my pentax instead. Like for triggering my flash wirelessly (i don't have a nikon flash :P) or using focus trap (cant seem to do that on a d3.. maby i just dont know how).
09-11-2009, 12:28 PM   #18
Veteran Member
Ratmagiclady's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: GA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 13,563
QuoteOriginally posted by Usuqa Quote
Id like to know how well the video is on the gf1 as that looks ideal (a great camera that dosnt look like an slr for taking to gigs with me) The gh1 sounds sweet and i love the articulated screen for video to but some ppl might still take it as a pro camera? (maby ill get it in red? :P)
Heh. That might do it, the red one. Won't look 'pro' anyway. Might end up attracting more attention than that factor would be worth in the first place, though. You're basically asking really busy bouncers to think about something that way if first impressions of seeing a big lens don't do it. It *might* be better on balance not to draw their eye in the first place.

Me, I just don't know if I could resist a Lumix in black, given the choice. They're really handsome. (I've got a Lumix bridge camera, an FZ-7 I got hold of some years ago. People who didn't know thought *that* must be a 'pro' camera, even if they were available at like Target.

I've got my reservations about 4/3 in general and EVIL tech as it stands, but I like the brand.
09-11-2009, 12:33 PM   #19
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Scotland
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 348
Original Poster
my first camera was a fz8 , i loved that little thing and it was amazing how much i missed the live view once i got my dslr (but i fell in love with the optical viewfinder to). Actually seeing on the screen what u were getting for the shot, live histograms and stuff (was great for macro). Alot of people asked me if that was a pro camera to lol

You are right the they do look alot better in black, how big i the gh1 kit lens? is it similar to the 50-200 on pentax?

09-11-2009, 01:00 PM   #20
Veteran Member
Ratmagiclady's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: GA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 13,563
QuoteOriginally posted by Usuqa Quote
my first camera was a fz8 , i loved that little thing and it was amazing how much i missed the live view once i got my dslr (but i fell in love with the optical viewfinder to). Actually seeing on the screen what u were getting for the shot, live histograms and stuff (was great for macro). Alot of people asked me if that was a pro camera to lol

You are right the they do look alot better in black, how big i the gh1 kit lens? is it similar to the 50-200 on pentax?
Heehee. The FZ-8 was a real sweet spot. They just made an FZ-7 with all the good stuff and addressed a number of the shortcomings (like lack of RAW and a behind-even-those-times EVF.) Some friends of mine got one of those cause they liked my 7, and when I got to try that out, I was like, 'Oooh, they did this up right.'

I've actually handled neither of the lenses in question, nor one of these new Lumix EVIL cameras. I believe the video-functional kit lens for the GH1 is pretty substantial, but if you use that one you get stepless aperture and something video-useful about the AF.

I'm not in the market for a thing like that, so I've only looked and listened enough to indulge technical curiosity about the things.

If you still use your FZ-8, or maybe one of these new things, get yourself a Bogen/Manfrotto Mini Flex-head. Incredibly useful, particularly if you're using the LCD for anything, video clips in particular. (Which I've done a total of twice but worked out OK)

Looks like this:

09-11-2009, 02:24 PM   #21
Veteran Member
er1kksen's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Forestville, NY
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,801
QuoteOriginally posted by Usuqa Quote

You are right the they do look alot better in black, how big i the gh1 kit lens? is it similar to the 50-200 on pentax?
The GH1 kit lens is about 5mm larger in both length and diameter, and almost twice as heavy. Minimalist it ain't.
09-11-2009, 05:46 PM   #22
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Scotland
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 348
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Ratmagiclady Quote
Heehee. The FZ-8 was a real sweet spot. They just made an FZ-7 with all the good stuff and addressed a number of the shortcomings (like lack of RAW and a behind-even-those-times EVF.) Some friends of mine got one of those cause they liked my 7, and when I got to try that out, I was like, 'Oooh, they did this up right.'

I've actually handled neither of the lenses in question, nor one of these new Lumix EVIL cameras. I believe the video-functional kit lens for the GH1 is pretty substantial, but if you use that one you get stepless aperture and something video-useful about the AF.

I'm not in the market for a thing like that, so I've only looked and listened enough to indulge technical curiosity about the things.

If you still use your FZ-8, or maybe one of these new things, get yourself a Bogen/Manfrotto Mini Flex-head. Incredibly useful, particularly if you're using the LCD for anything, video clips in particular. (Which I've done a total of twice but worked out OK)

Looks like this:


I actually gave my fz8 away to a friend , she was interested in photography and i hardly used the little thing (shame tho it was good).

QuoteOriginally posted by er1kksen Quote
The GH1 kit lens is about 5mm larger in both length and diameter, and almost twice as heavy. Minimalist it ain't.
Yer i looked around more and i see that now, altho being a 28-280mm equiv seems like a nice super zoom lens and with the video capability's to would be nice to have. I think the gh1 with a 20mm f1.7 attached would be pretty small tho but it seems you actually have to buy a gf1 to get that lens for now.

I love the look/design of the ep1 and there's some stick on wood stuff you can get to wich i think makes it looks lovely.. IBS as well like the penatax and looks nothing like an slr.. lots of good points, but the tech side of the gh1 keeps winning me over (multi aspect sensor.. its a 14mp 4/3 sensor thats larger than normal), EVF (i liked that in my fz8 when it was to sunny), flip out screen and dosnt really look much bigger if you were to put a prime onto it (the 20mm f1.7 is about the same as the hand grip in depth)


Strange thing happend today when i was testing a shot with the gx10 and the d3. Similar focal lenghts (45mm / 70mm) same shutter 1/30 and f2.8 on both and the gx10 went to iso 1600 and the d3 to iso 900. The gx10 shot is very slightly brighter than the d3 one but with alot of noise while the d3 shoot looks rather clean.

Dont know why such an iso difference.


Name:  gx10.jpg
Views: 221
Size:  158.5 KB
gx10
Name:  d3.jpg
Views: 244
Size:  129.7 KB
d3
(both images cropped and resized some.. so noise looks a bit less, WB adjustment in LR everything else default)

Im thinking about doing some test's with the 50-135 and 80-200 to compare them better got lots of work atm tho


Last edited by Usuqa; 09-11-2009 at 05:54 PM.
09-11-2009, 06:49 PM   #23
Veteran Member
er1kksen's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Forestville, NY
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,801
QuoteOriginally posted by Usuqa Quote
Yer i looked around more and i see that now, altho being a 28-280mm equiv seems like a nice super zoom lens and with the video capability's to would be nice to have. I think the gh1 with a 20mm f1.7 attached would be pretty small tho but it seems you actually have to buy a gf1 to get that lens for now.




Strange thing happend today when i was testing a shot with the gx10 and the d3. Similar focal lenghts (45mm / 70mm) same shutter 1/30 and f2.8 on both and the gx10 went to iso 1600 and the d3 to iso 900. The gx10 shot is very slightly brighter than the d3 one but with alot of noise while the d3 shoot looks rather clean.

Dont know why such an iso difference.
Actually, you can get the 20mm at around $400, though you really might save a bundle by getting the GF1+20mm and selling the GF1 body for $750 or so. Of course, I'd rather have the GF1+20mm together due to the smaller size, but horses for courses. Prices should come down once they actually hit the market. The G1 dropped a few hundred in the first couple weeks, at least for all those happy buyers who used reliable ebay stores.

2/3 stop ISO difference does seem a little odd, I've got to say. Then again, the GX10 shot is a little brighter, as you mentioned. It could just be that the sensors or camera profiles tend to render differently, making them look closer than they actually are. Have you compared the RAW histograms?
09-12-2009, 07:50 PM   #24
Veteran Member
RawheaD's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: MA, USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 831
QuoteOriginally posted by er1kksen Quote
And what HAVE you heard?


{snip}

At low ISOs and when you don't need ridiculous dynamic range the results should be on par with what you get from your D3. One poster I recall on Luminous Landscape found it slightly superior to his D300 for low-ISO landscape work.

Well, that's it. Of course if you limit the situations under which you shoot, I'm quite sure the Panny is a great competitor. So are PowerShots and Lumixes and CyberShots. The fact of the matter is, whenever you shrink the sensor, you're going to sacrifice image quality in certain respects, whether it be DoF, high ISO performance, or whatever, and APS-C is small enough, by going from there to MFT, you're absolutely sacrificing more.


So sure, if you limit your shooting to well lit landscape shots, the Panny with the 7-14 might be terrific (although I would like to see a shoot-off with my K-7 + 12-24 ;-)) But what about when you want to do low light / no-flash photography inside a cathedral? Or when you want to shoot that creamy bokeh portrait of your better half?

Those are exactly the things I've heard about the MFT system in general (not just theh Pannys), and those are the reasons why I would, personally, never get rid of a Pentax APS-C cam in favor of an MFT. Could it be my third-in-line camera (after my Canon EOS 5D)?? Sure it could, but it'd be mainly for the video capabiities :-)
09-13-2009, 08:31 AM   #25
Veteran Member
er1kksen's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Forestville, NY
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,801
The GH1 is, image-quality-wise, in a completely different league than the powershots and lumixes (I'm assuming you're referring to the small-sensor compacts, as their 4/3 cameras are also labeled lumix) and cybershots you mention.

Yes, you're sacrificing quality as compared to full-frame. But compared to APS-C, there's hardly any difference. The noise handling, DR, and resolution of the latest 4/3 sensors are hardly distinguishable from the APS-C crowd. Differences in the past were mostly due to Panasonic not being able to get their act together on sensor design, not due to the miniscule size difference between APS-C and 4/3. Those situations you mention could hardly be done better with APS-C than 4/3, and mostly depend on the lens selection. If you want ultrawide, m4/3 absolutely does have the advantage over your K-7, while your K-7 may have an advantage with the bokeh if you feel you need to shoot close. Low-light no flash photography would likely be a wash.

Depending on the shooter and their needs, I can see a lot of reasons to take m4/3 over Pentax APS-C, and vice versa.
09-17-2009, 12:53 AM   #26
Veteran Member
res3567's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Houston Tx.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,876
Hell to the no!!!!!
09-17-2009, 01:01 AM   #27
Dom
Guest




Never, never, no, defiantly not! Not for my but if it works for you go for it.
09-17-2009, 01:05 AM   #28
and
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,476
No, but I am considering selling my lx3 towards a gf1
09-22-2009, 12:51 AM   #29
Veteran Member
RawheaD's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: MA, USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 831
QuoteOriginally posted by er1kksen Quote
If you want ultrawide, m4/3 absolutely does have the advantage over your K-7

Wait, how can you say that when I can get a Pentax 10-17 and use it as a diagonal fisheye on the wider side, or a Sigma 4.5mm and use it as a circular fisheye? Where are the m4/3 equivalents for those lenses?? Basically, there's *one* lens, the 7-14mm that has a 1mm edge over the Sigma 10-20mm in terms of FOV on the wide end (but fall 2mm short on the long end), and you say m4/3 has a definite advantage over all APS-C cameras regarding ultra-wide (which is pretty much what you are saying)?

Putting aside IQ (which would most likely be a fruitless debate), I can definitely give the m4/3 + 7-14mm a huge thumbs-up on their compactness. As has been said, that'd be a perfect travel cam if you're constrained on space in your luggage. On the other hand, I would NEVER swap my DA 12-24mm for that lens/cam combo, since that lens can't take my beloved Hoya R72, Circular Polarizer, and ND400 filters. When I shoot my 12-24, I usually have one of those three on it, and wouldn't have it any other way.

So, you see, your "definite advantage" is actually quite subjective, and highly debateable. The only thing definite about it is compactness, but you should expect that from m4/3, since that is their raison d'être. If there is somebody who is into ultrawide landscape photography, I must say it would be remiss to recommend to him/her an m4/3 as having some sort of inherent advantage for that kind of photography, just because of one lens (that can't even take filters).

Last edited by RawheaD; 09-22-2009 at 12:59 AM.
09-22-2009, 05:31 AM   #30
Inactive Account




Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Brisbane, QLD, AUS
Posts: 3,261
My thoughts on the GH1:

Maria, madre de dios! RRP of $2849AU?!?!

Two thousand, eight hundred and forty-nine dollary-doos. For a camera with no OVF, lenses with a "we'll-fix-it-in-post" design philosophy - no doubt due in part to the small sensor. Basically, it's a camera with all the cons and none of the pros of an SLR.

Oh, but wait, at least it's tiny-



Not really. It's not worth-twice-as-much tiny. Yes, I'm well aware that the Lumix has got a bigger lens on it, but I'm looking at the bodies. To me, though, design is half the battle with the perception of compactness, and with the faux-pentaprism and flash housing on it anyway, they may as well have put a real mirror housing and prism in there. If you've got all those bits hanging off it, it makes it look bigger than it is.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
d3, dont, gx10, love, movie, pentax, pentax stuff, sigma, stuff
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Panasonic GF1 w/ Pentax Lenses deadwolfbones Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands 4 03-05-2010 05:51 PM
How not to sell stuff in the Photo/Video Section of Craigslist dragonfly General Talk 2 02-03-2010 02:54 AM
Is Pentax Future after K7 APS-C version of Pentax GH1 Photomy Pentax News and Rumors 85 06-08-2009 09:55 PM
How do you sell your Pentax stuff 713alan Photographic Technique 10 07-24-2008 01:26 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:20 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top