[cg57]

Overcast, rainy day. Got out for shot anyway.

[northcoastgreg]

Industry on the bay, with the Pany 45-175:

[Marcus Rowland]

I picked up a Panasonic Lumix 3.5-5.6 14-42 G Vario lens in Cash Converters sale last week, so I took it out to my usual test site (Kensington Gardens in London) to test it on assorted bits of statuary, trees, etc. I think that with this lens I'm really seeing the point of Micro 4/3 - it's about 2/3 the length and diameter and half the weight of the 4/3 (not Micro) Olympus equivalent I've been using, and doesn't need a converter stuck on the back to fit on the camera. And even on my G1, which is fairly heavy for this format, the combination is REALLY light compared to lugging a full-sized SLR around. I'm not convinced that there's much difference in image quality, both are good but I wouldn't say exceptional, but for my purposes it's fine. A few pictures:











The album is here:

Panasonic Lumix 14-42 G Vario | Flickr

[WPRESTO]

Lighthouse that's now a tourist destination.

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

[UncleVanya]

Generated from my Motorola o using tools.sportscard.trade

[edri]

Until what ISO do you go the ones using the m43 system? I would like an easier, less bulky ML system for travel, hiking, cycling. But I use KP exclusively (rarely KS2), at this moment, KP we all know that it behaves excellent at high ISO values. Choosing an ML system, I wouldn't want to go back to the ISO limitations I had with K7. Perhaps, though, Ricoh's are thinking of announcing that they will start working on a new ML. For me it would be the preferred option.

[WPRESTO]

Pany G9, Oly 60mm macro, about 75% of original image area cropped off.

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

[Leumas]

Nice shot!

I've thought about getting that 60mm
But I think I'll do the pany one

[WPRESTO]

Nice shot!

I've thought about getting that 60mm
But I think I'll do the pany one

Think about what you photograph and the distance lens to subject. I selected the Oly because of the longer FL = greater lens-to-subject for insects. If your macros are primarily static subjects, = objects, flowers, then the Pany macro will serve as well as the Oly. I also use a Sigma 150mm f2.8 macro in Canon mount via an "ultra" 0.7X adapter that gives me the FF equivalent of a 210mm f2.0 macro. The "ultra" adapter increases both contrast and overall IQ compared to mounting the SIgma via a no-glass adapter (true, both independent tests and my own informal testing confirm the improvement). , It's a reasonable substitute for my 200mm f4 Pentax macro although it doesn't have quite the IQ of that amazing lens

[UncleVanya]

Until what ISO do you go the ones using the m43 system? I would like an easier, less bulky ML system for travel, hiking, cycling. But I use KP exclusively (rarely KS2), at this moment, KP we all know that it behaves excellent at high ISO values. Choosing an ML system, I wouldn't want to go back to the ISO limitations I had with K7. Perhaps, though, Ricoh's are thinking of announcing that they will start working on a new ML. For me it would be the preferred option.

Subject dependant... I'll shoot at whatever it takes. But best images are under 1600.

[Leumas]

Think about what you photograph and the distance lens to subject. I selected the Oly because of the longer FL = greater lens-to-subject for insects. If your macros are primarily static subjects, = objects, flowers, then the Pany macro will serve as well as the Oly. I also use a Sigma 150mm f2.8 macro in Canon mount via an "ultra" 0.7X adapter that gives me the FF equivalent of a 210mm f2.0 macro. The "ultra" adapter increases both contrast and overall IQ compared to mounting the SIgma via a no-glass adapter (true, both independent tests and my own informal testing confirm the improvement). , It's a reasonable substitute for my 200mm f4 Pentax macro although it doesn't have quite the IQ of that amazing lens

Yes....I like the focal length but dislike no dual IS or DFD....

[edom31]

Hope I'm not so much off topic but... looking into getting a OM-D E-M10 Mark II (I see camera decision rates the ii better than the iii)... Background:

Digital I shoot 90% k-50 and 10% Canon 450D.

Why I want to do 4/3s or micro 4/3s = I want to use my Rookor 58/1.4... and some other MD mount lenses I have (nothing fancy). That's it. That's my reason. I want a good mirrorless that can accept easily and without added glass legacy lenses.

Is it good or anything better out there / more cost-effective?

[sundown]

I want to use my Rookor 58/1.4... and some other MD mount lenses I have (nothing fancy). That's it. That's my reason. I want a good mirrorless that can accept easily and without added glass legacy lenses.

You know that 58mm will become 116mm in FF terms, right? Quite the jump - hope it meets your needs.

[edom31]

You know that 58mm will become 116mm in FF terms, right? Quite the jump - hope it meets your needs.

I did read about this and yes, i can accept it. It'll be portrait suitable

[Leumas]

I did read about this and yes, i can accept it. It'll be portrait suitable

As much as I love my M4/3. If my goal was just to adapt legacy manual glass on the cheap, I'd buy a used original A7 FF.
Legacy glass doesn't shine very well in my experience on the smaller, more pixel dense M4/3. You'll get much more out of those lenses adapting them to a FF. And you can find original A7's cheaper than dirt on ebay.