Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
01-15-2012, 08:13 PM - 2 Likes   #1
Veteran Member
Laurentiu Cristofor's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: WA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,044
Micro Four Thirds Club

As the title says, if you have a MFT camera and want to share your experience using it, this thread is meant for it. Please mention the camera and lenses used.

To start, here are a few shots from my E-PL2 with the Nokton 25/0.95:








Last edited by Laurentiu Cristofor; 04-16-2012 at 11:47 PM.
01-15-2012, 08:26 PM   #2
Pentaxian
Swift1's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Oregon
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,393
I'll join in the fun.

This is a shot I took while testing out the Panasonic m4/3 14-42mm zoom on my Olympus E-P1.
Lighting courtesy of the sun and a cookie sheet.
01-16-2012, 01:38 AM   #3
Veteran Member
darrenleow's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Chicago
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 541
Been a long time since posting here because my K-5 and K20D are both out for servicing and have been put on hold due to parts backorder from Japan.. No choice but to keep shooting with my E-P2 (which I really like) and a borrowed Nikon set-up (D300 and some big zooms, which I really can't get used to).

Anyway, I recently got a K to M4/3 adapter that can control aperture so I can use my DA lenses (10-17 12-24, 17-50, 70-200 even!) on my E-P2. Previously had an adapter that could not control aperture so I could only use FA31 and A50.

The bigger zooms don't make sense, but it's good to be able to use a specialty lens like the fisheye on both systems now.

Here's a shot with the 10-17 on E-P2, I think the lens "feels" more like a wide-angle lens because the fisheye effect is not so pronounced with the edges cropped off by the smaller sensor. Also, the gridlines in the EVF/LCD make it much easier to compose for symmetry with the fisheye lens compared to the OVF.


Grand Central Terminal, NYC
01-16-2012, 04:55 AM   #4
Veteran Member
gtxtom's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Philly
Posts: 395
I've been thinking of getting the fotodiox adapter with aperture control, but haven't yet. That shot sure makes me want it, though ... I want to try my fisheye on my GF2!

01-16-2012, 04:58 AM - 5 Likes   #5
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,404
Here's a few from a recent hike with the GH2


Lumix 7-14/f4


m.ZD 40-150


m.ZD 40-150


Lumix 20/f1.7


Lumix 7-14/f4


m.ZD 40-150 MSC


m.ZD 40-150 MSC


Lumix 20/f1.7


Lumix 7-14/f4
01-16-2012, 11:31 PM   #6
Pentaxian
Swift1's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Oregon
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,393
QuoteOriginally posted by nickthetasmaniac Quote
Here's a few from a recent hike with the GH2
Great set Nick, I especially like #5.
How do you like the Panny 7-14mm?
01-16-2012, 11:51 PM   #7
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,404
QuoteOriginally posted by Swift1 Quote
Great set Nick, I especially like #5.
How do you like the Panny 7-14mm?
Thanks! Optically the 7-14 is fantastic, and it also has very nice build quality. It is, however, very wide, and for a more normal walk-around wide-angle the m.ZD 9-18 may be a better option. I only use wide-angles for landscape so for me it's a perfect range.

The only two real 'issues' I have with it are:
- f4 aperture - for long exposures in very low light (eg: f4 @ 60" and 1600iso) it would be nice to have an f2.8.
- can't fit filters - this is really only problematic if you want to use ND filters for daylight long-exposures (like moving water) as you'd never use a CPL on a lens this wide anyway...

For what it's worth, both complaints are more a comment on the type of lens, rather than the Lumix specifically - f2.8 ultra-wides are massive, and almost no 14mm equivalent lenses can take filters...
01-17-2012, 12:36 AM   #8
Veteran Member
Laurentiu Cristofor's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: WA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,044
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Swift1 Quote
This is a shot I took while testing out the Panasonic m4/3 14-42mm zoom on my Olympus E-P1.
The zoom kit lens is so much nicer than the Pentax equivalent. It may be just the fact that it focuses more accurately, but I like the results I get with it much more than the ones I was getting from the DA 18-55.

01-17-2012, 10:27 AM   #9
Pentaxian
Swift1's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Oregon
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,393
QuoteOriginally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor Quote
The zoom kit lens is so much nicer than the Pentax equivalent. It may be just the fact that it focuses more accurately, but I like the results I get with it much more than the ones I was getting from the DA 18-55.
I agree. I tried many times to like both the 18-55 AL and the AL II version and was never happy with the results. There are many photos on the net that show, when used right, it is a fine lens but I never had much luck with it.
So far, I have only tried the Panasonic 14-42 kit lens and haven't tried any Oly versions. It seems to me that in the 14-35 range the lens is quite good but I haven't been overly impressed with the long end.
Here's a test shot I took with the GF3. This is about the best I've got at 42mm so far.
01-17-2012, 11:34 AM - 1 Like   #10
Veteran Member
Laurentiu Cristofor's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: WA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,044
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Swift1 Quote
I agree. I tried many times to like both the 18-55 AL and the AL II version and was never happy with the results. There are many photos on the net that show, when used right, it is a fine lens but I never had much luck with it.
So far, I have only tried the Panasonic 14-42 kit lens and haven't tried any Oly versions. It seems to me that in the 14-35 range the lens is quite good but I haven't been overly impressed with the long end.
Here's a test shot I took with the GF3. This is about the best I've got at 42mm so far.
I read too fast and I missed that it was the Panasonic version you were referring too. Looks similar to what I got from the Olympus version.

Sorry for reposting these, but I don't have other samples from the 14-42. These are both at 42mm wide open (f/5.6, that is ):



01-17-2012, 01:28 PM   #11
Pentaxian
Swift1's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Oregon
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,393
QuoteOriginally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor Quote
I read too fast and I missed that it was the Panasonic version you were referring too. Looks similar to what I got from the Olympus version.

Sorry for reposting these, but I don't have other samples from the 14-42. These are both at 42mm wide open (f/5.6, that is ):
Do you know which of the Oly m4/3 14-42 lenses is supposedly better or are they pretty much the same?
01-17-2012, 04:07 PM   #12
Veteran Member
Laurentiu Cristofor's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: WA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,044
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Swift1 Quote
Do you know which of the Oly m4/3 14-42 lenses is supposedly better or are they pretty much the same?
I don't think there is much difference between the II and the IIR. I don't know about the earlier version.
01-17-2012, 10:07 PM   #13
Pentaxian
Aegon's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 1,414
Oldest version:
• able to focus closer
• wobbly barrel

Mark ii:
• supposedly sharper
• can't focus as closely (I'm not sure how much of a difference there is).
• early reviews were negative, but someone found out that if you had been using the older version on your body then you need to reset the lens in the body's control panel. After that, people seem to think it performs slightly better.
• bayonet-style hood attachment
• quiet motor for movies
• pretty fast focusing

ii R:
• better looking
• same optics as Mark ii
• ships with the latest firmware (though the Mark ii version can be upgraded to identical firmware to support faster-focusing recent bodies)
• bayonet-style hood attachment with dummy ring for cleaner appearance
• quiet motor for movies
• pretty fast focusing

The bayonet attachments, such as fisheye, macro, and tele(?) cannot fit on the oldest version. Maybe older non-bayonet versions existed, but I don't know.

That's all stuff I've seen on the internet, I don't have extensive first hand experience.
01-17-2012, 10:28 PM   #14
Pentaxian
Swift1's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Oregon
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,393
QuoteOriginally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor Quote
I don't think there is much difference between the II and the IIR. I don't know about the earlier version.
QuoteOriginally posted by Aegon Quote
Oldest version:
able to focus closer
wobbly barrel

Mark ii:
supposedly sharper
can't focus as closely (I'm not sure how much of a difference there is).
early reviews were negative, but someone found out that if you had been using the older version on your body then you need to reset the lens in the body's control panel. After that, people seem to think it performs slightly better.
bayonet-style hood attachment
quiet motor for movies
pretty fast focusing

ii R:
better looking
same optics as Mark ii
ships with the latest firmware (though the Mark ii version can be upgraded to identical firmware to support faster-focusing recent bodies)
bayonet-style hood attachment with dummy ring for cleaner appearance
quiet motor for movies
pretty fast focusing

The bayonet attachments, such as fisheye, macro, and tele(?) cannot fit on the oldest version. Maybe older non-bayonet versions existed, but I don't know.

That's all stuff I've seen on the internet, I don't have extensive first hand experience.

Thanks guys,
I think I'll keep an eye out for one of the 2 latest versions.
01-18-2012, 01:14 PM   #15
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2010
Location: Veluwe
Posts: 339
Once upon a very blue and cold day, the Fata Morgana speeded down the river IJssel ...

Last edited by PentaxMom Felua; 02-12-2012 at 02:34 AM.
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!
20mm, aaron, andrew, camera, communities, couple, dec, e-p5, eddie, equiv, filter, flickr, flores, focus, gear, ii, john, lens, lenses, m43, macro, oct, olympus, omd, panasonic, pentax, pm, post, smith, version
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
comparing adapters for Micro Four Thirds (MFT) rparmar Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 25 08-09-2011 10:01 PM
Kr/Kx or Micro Four Thirds snowfreak Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 16 07-18-2011 01:12 PM
Leica 25mm f/1.4 for Micro Four Thirds jct us101 Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 3 06-13-2011 05:46 AM
Pentax seriously considering joining Micro Four Thirds? iht Pentax News and Rumors 2 04-30-2010 11:49 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:36 PM. | 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