Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Panasonic / Leica dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 4, 2010, 4:57 PM   #21
Senior Member
 
Tullio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,370
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmacmusic View Post
... whilst I've been thinking the GF1 doesn't do ISO6400, where the E-P1 does, ...
But, ISO 6400 is useless. Even 3200 is useless. Not very many cameras out there can produce clean images at ISO 3200. So, high ISO is nothing but a marketing gimmick.
__________________

Tullio
Tullio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 4, 2010, 5:33 PM   #22
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 477
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shoturtle View Post
mrmacmusic,

Are you a jpeg shooter or raw shooter. Another thing to consider is if you shoot jpeg. The Oly has a way better jpeg engine then the panny. So you get a better product in this format. If you are a raw shoot, then it is a moot point. More to consider.
And another factor.....

Panasonic always learn from what customers are telling them. So it stands to reason that Panasonic will have greatly improved jpeg engines on the G2 & G10..... I guess we will soon find out.
dnas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 4, 2010, 5:38 PM   #23
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

Very true, I guess that is why the epl-1 only goes to 3200iso. And that is very noisy. I can imagine how m4/3 would look at 3200iso.

If you want to shoot at 3200, 6400 or even 12800 you would want an aps-c camera from pentax or canon..

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tullio View Post
But, ISO 6400 is useless. Even 3200 is useless. Not very many cameras out there can produce clean images at ISO 3200. So, high ISO is nothing but a marketing gimmick.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 4, 2010, 6:05 PM   #24
Senior Member
 
mrmacmusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Central Scotland
Posts: 274
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tullio View Post
But, ISO 6400 is useless. Even 3200 is useless. Not very many cameras out there can produce clean images at ISO 3200. So, high ISO is nothing but a marketing gimmick.
...but maybe I don't want clean images!

OK, so I do really, but then there may well be that odd occasion where I could do with using ISO 3200..... At the end of the day, it depends on the subject, and what mood and ambience I'm trying to convey - a little grain isn't necessarily a bad thing, is it? (OK, so it's not "a little" judging by the GF1 high ISO sample shots, but you get my drift I hope!!).
mrmacmusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 4, 2010, 6:06 PM   #25
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 477
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dnas View Post
Personally, I would like to see a G10 with touchscreen to reduce the control buttons on the back, making the camera smaller in width and height. Then I'd like to see the shutter repositioned closer to the sensor, and a new pancake lens that recesses partially inside the camera when turned off, making the camera less deep as well. This way, we could still have a full function Micro 4/3 camera, but much smaller and more pocket-able.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmacmusic View Post
Which is quite close to my LX3 replacement theory... I'm not sure how thin the body could be, but with a retracting fixed lens it should be feasible to reduce the size at least a little bit. I like your idea, but I reckon the pancake's probably about as small as it could be already whilst still being usable!!
Something like this. Standard pancake on the right, the "retractable" on the left, working position and retracted:

dnas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 4, 2010, 6:35 PM   #26
Senior Member
 
Tullio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,370
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmacmusic View Post
... I'm trying to convey - a little grain isn't necessarily a bad thing, is it? (OK, so it's not "a little" judging by the GF1 high ISO sample shots, but you get my drift I hope!!).
Yes, it is not a "little", that's for sure. The thing is, there is a huge difference between grain added in PP to simulate a particular mood and high ISO grain. Images shot at ISO 3200 and 6400 are not just grainy. They lack resolution big time. I can't think of anything really that I might want to capture so badly and due to light conditions I need ISO 6400 or I will not be able to capture it. Let's not forget, the difference between ISO 3200 and 6400 in terms of shutter speed is 1 f/stop only. So, if I'm in a situation where the shot will either be taken at 1/5 with ISO 3200 or 1/10 with ISO 6400, I think I might be better off with the former combination as the image will be much more usable.
__________________

Tullio
Tullio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 4, 2010, 6:41 PM   #27
Senior Member
 
mrmacmusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Central Scotland
Posts: 274
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shoturtle View Post
Very true, I guess that is why the epl-1 only goes to 3200iso. And that is very noisy. I can imagine how m4/3 would look at 3200iso.

If you want to shoot at 3200, 6400 or even 12800 you would want an aps-c camera from pentax or canon..
I don't know that I want to shoot at these kinds of levels..... it's all about balancing subject matter, shutter speed and aperture and seeing where that takes me! Whilst I used an f/1.8 50mm on my old 40D, I was generally limited to f/4 on my everyday lens - I didn't use it much beyond ISO1600 even for indoors non-flash stuff (using 50mm around f/2.2-2.8). As long as I can get the same exposures with a G-series camera and 20mm pancake, I'll be a happy bunny....

I hadn't seen the DxO Mark website until recently, and it's mighty interesting reading. Considering the differences between user-set and 'actual' ISO, it'll be curious to see what ISO800 exposures in my own living room are like on a G-series (which measures an actual ISO of 1184) - where my 40D set to ISO1600 had a lower actual ISO of 1088.....

Unless I'm reading all this the wrong way, it would therefore appear that at ISO800, the GF1 is more sensitive than my 40D was at ISO1600 - I was happy using ISO1600 on the 40D and there's nothing wrong with the noise levels in the GF1 ISO800 images. Shaping up very nicely thank you very much!

One thing I do want to do, is start doing more creative video work (which was impossible with my old Canon), so I'm doubly keen to see what Panasonic puts into the G2. Having long considered the PENs and GF1, I do have to admit that the GH1 has always been mighty tempting, but just a little more than I wanted to spend right now.

Again, this comes back to what I was speculating earlier about the range following Panasonic's forthcoming announcements. How about this for a line up...

G10 - smaller than GF1, fixed 3x f/2-4 lens (?), touchscreen @ 500
GF1 - as current line up (now available in pink of course) @ 600-700
G2 - sensor/engine from GH1, 1920x1080 (17Mb/s), updated 14-45 'HD' lens (?) @ 900
GH1 - as current model with 14-140 HD lens @ 1100

(with the GH2 released later in the year, featuring better AVCHD 35Mb/s video, improved screen 920k etc..).

We shall see!
mrmacmusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 4, 2010, 6:45 PM   #28
Senior Member
 
mrmacmusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Central Scotland
Posts: 274
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dnas View Post
Something like this. Standard pancake on the right, the "retractable" on the left, working position and retracted:

Very nice.... but I can't see it myself. Could be wrong of course, and I'm not hedging my bets on a fixed 3x f/2-4 lens - just seems plausible.
mrmacmusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 4, 2010, 6:59 PM   #29
Senior Member
 
mrmacmusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Central Scotland
Posts: 274
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tullio View Post
Yes, it is not a "little", that's for sure. The thing is, there is a huge difference between grain added in PP to simulate a particular mood and high ISO grain. Images shot at ISO 3200 and 6400 are not just grainy. They lack resolution big time. I can't think of anything really that I might want to capture so badly and due to light conditions I need ISO 6400 or I will not be able to capture it. Let's not forget, the difference between ISO 3200 and 6400 in terms of shutter speed is 1 f/stop only. So, if I'm in a situation where the shot will either be taken at 1/5 with ISO 3200 or 1/10 with ISO 6400, I think I might be better off with the former combination as the image will be much more usable.
I agree there's a big difference between aesthetic 'grain' and chroma or luminance noise..... I also appreciate your point about a single stop - but when you're talking about moving subjects (children, sports, flying aerobatics etc..), and you've got a choice between 1/30 (1600) and 1/60 (3200) - the faster shutter could well be advantageous, even if it means a trip to Photoshop and NeatImage to clean things up a bit.
mrmacmusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 4, 2010, 7:49 PM   #30
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

mrmacmusic,

Just to give you something else to consider. If you put the non stabilize panny 20mm 1.7 onto the inbody IS of a pen. It would give you a fantastic low light camera set up in the m4/3 world. Give close to 1.1 to 1.2 in performance.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 2:06 PM.