Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/04/15
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]To me, it's a terrific combination of the size / image quality / price / ease of use. Hardly larger than many high-end PS cameras, particularly combined with the excellent (but of course not Leica quality) Panny 20mm which is just about the only lens I use now with my EP-1. The image quality certainly doesn't match that of my M8, but just about equal to most consumer-level DSLRs at a similar price point. If I want to bring a camera in my coat pocket, it's my EP-1 with a Panny 20mm. If I want to bring a camera slung over my shoulder, it's my M8 with a Summilux ASPH 35mm. If I want to bring a camera with a few lenses, it's my M8 and my Billingham Leica bag. For the type of photography I do, I rarely see a need for a DSLR. The live view feature of the EP-1 is actually an advantage compared to DSLR, IMHO. On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 1:15 PM, Vince Passaro <passaro.vince at gmail.com>wrote: > You guys are only fanning the flames, man. He's gonna come over that > hilltop > like a lion now. > > What you're essentially saying is: this is a totally effing great -- > stupendous -- step up from point and shoot digital pocket cameras, why it's > so well done, it's almost if you close one eye just about as good as a good > APS-C. > > Which is true. > > What Mark is saying is: this is not a serious camera because no amount of > features or good technology can overcome its sensor size issues and if > you're serious as an artist or a professional you should be talking about > something else. > > Which is probably also true. > > Though, to do justice to the camera and to artists in general, a serious > artist can make something lasting out of a stick and a rock. So the m4/3 > cameras are at least good enough to make very good pictures with. Just not > at big enough size/high enough res to pass muster professionally. > > I still expect to hear screams and broken bones in the dark of night > however. > > Vince > > > On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 2:33 PM, David Rodgers <drodgers at casefarms.com > >wrote: > > > I bought a GF-1 because it seemed the most economical way for me to be > > able to use some of my existing lenses -- which quite frankly were > > gathering dust -- as well as replace a 5-year old Fuji P&S. > > > > Micro Four Thirds is better than I anticipated and it has rekindled my > > interest in photography. I'm sure an EP-2 would have done the same. > > > > The image quality from micro Four Thirds format is pretty darn good. > > Where it's lacking, compared to an FX format camera like the D700 is the > > low light capability. Still, Micro Four Thirds is OK at 1600 and really > > good at 400-800. Thus light gathering capability isn't a strength (OTOH, > > after years of shooting Tri_X, it isn't necessarily a weakness either). > > > > Resolution is excellent for such small sized cameras. Image quality is > > closer to an APS-C camera than a P&S, but camera size is closer to a P&S > > than an APS-C camera. > > > > On top of all that there seems to be a lot of R&D surrounding the format > > right now. That's resulting in good optics, good camera features, and > > generally more options from which to choose. > > > > Dave R > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Leica Users Group. > > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > -- Ken Iisaka first name at last name dot org or com