Panasonic G3 with 14-150mm lens.

All images - Panasonic G3 Olympus 14-150mm zoom lens

A very useful lens and one which at the wide end is very good indeed.

I do really need something for m4/3 which is decent as a telephoto and is relatively light. The 14-150mm is unfortunately not great at the 150mm end. 

I'm not that impressed with the Panasonic 14-140mm at its longest end either, and the other Panasonic and Olympus telephoto zooms seem somewhat bulky.

Hopefully the new 45-175mm x lens might work. Its certainly the right focal length, and the right size and weight. I'm hoping that Panasonics description of it as being optically superior are true. Time will tell.

Photographing two seasons with an Olympus E-P3 - Bought Panasonic G3

Olympus E-P3 14-150mm zoom

An afternoon of warm sunshine, provided an unusual photographic opportunity. For some reason there is an autumnal look to many of my local landscapes. Leaves are falling off the trees and many are turning brown and yellow. Its been a warm, dry though not particularly sunny summer, so maybe that explains it. At the same time some of the harvesting has been late, providing an interesting contrast and letting me photograph two seasons at once!

Olympus E-P3 14-150mm zoom

Panasonic Leica m4/3 25mm f/1.4 Olympus E-P3

Because of the slow release of the latest Photoshop ACR update, I have to a certain extent been holding off on using the Olympus E-P3. I've not been that keen to take pictures with the camera only to see the results as jpgs or as unsatisfactory raw conversions. 

Now being able to see the files the camera shoots processed well via Photoshop I can appreciate just how good it is. I mentioned briefly yesterday how when developed from raw, like for like, the E-P3 produces sharper images for me than the Sony NEX-C3. The weaker anti-aliasing filter really does make a difference here, though as I always point out, this is the view of a confirmed "pixel-peeper" who studies images at very close quarters and in great detail. The difference is not that great in real terms as indeed the difference between all the cameras I use is also not that great. However there is one and I can see it.

Olympus E-P3 14-150mm zoom

Panasonic Leica m4/3 25mm f/1.4 Olympus E-P3

I took out my Olympus 14-150mm zoom, which I haven't used much since I bought it. A very useful lens, and very decent quality, apart from the 150mm end which is a bit soft.

I also took out my "clicking" Panasonic Leica m4/3 25mm f/1.4. In the forums where I was trying to discover what the problem was with the lens, a couple of other owners have mentioned how loud it is on Olympus bodies. One mentioned that it sounded like a rattlesnake! I haven't encountered one of those in the flesh, but the analogy is a good one.

With regard to this, I went to my local Jessops store and asked if I could try the lens on a Panasonic G3. I took the E-P3 body along and demonstrated the phenonenon, which caused great interest. It was greatly reduced on the G3. Still there yes, but nowhere near as bad. Panasonic cameras also apparently change apertures in larger steps whereas Olympus bodies do it bit by bit. So when the aperture blades move to adjust to the light its a lot less noticeable on cameras like the G3.

I decided to buy the G3 and I will be selling my E-PL1 and the m4/3 kit lenses I have accumulated to pay for it. Its good to know that the 25mm f/1.4 lens I have isn't faulty, though those planning to use it on Olympus bodies should be aware of what it may do. I should say that its even noisier on the E-PL1.

<

Panasonic Leica m4/3 25mm f/1.4 Lumix G3

When I originally handled a G3 I didn't like the feel of it at all. However trying it in the store with the 25mm it felt a lot more substantial. Getting it home I tried it with a couple of the leather cases I have and found it fitted into the converted Leica M9 case I have been using with the E-P3. This improved the grip even more. Panasonic keep trying to make their cameras smaller and I keep trying to make them bigger!!

Panasonic Leica m4/3 25mm f/1.4 Lumix G3

A short period of shooting with the G3 showed that its a very capable camera, and I particularly like the pinpoint focusing option, which proved to be incredibly useful, and very accurate.

Panasonic Leica m4/3 25mm f/1.4 Lumix G3

Panasonic Leica m4/3 25mm f/1.4 Lumix G3

Panasonic Leica m4/3 25mm f/1.4 Lumix G3

I am very impressed with the 25mm f/1.4, despite its strange aperture clicks, and my first impressions are very positive. It is VERY sharp, and its also very sharp wide open. Following on from the 20mm f/1.7 which was also very good indeed at its maximum aperture, Panasonic have followed that up with another excellent fast lens. 

I'm going to be starting a more detailed review with comparison shots soon, but I don't think I'm going to be saying much thats negative about its optical performance.

Olympus E-PL1 and Photoshop - "Correct" Exposure

Olympus E-PL1 14-150mm

While I've been very impressed with what Capture One Pro from Phase One can do, I am unsure as to whether I'm going to buy it when my trial period runs out. Firstly its expensive, though they are offering a 30% discount until 28th August. Secondly, its more complicated and takes longer to process images than Adobe Camera Raw and Photoshop. Thirdly, its not really how I like to work. I prefer a simpler raw conversion that lets me do the majority of the work I want to on a file in Photoshop, rather than in the raw conversion software.

Olympus E-PL1 14-150mm

Olympus E-PL1 14-150mm

The trial I have downloaded also lets me try out the Express version of the software, though the nice thing about the Pro version is that it lets me open the files immediately in Photoshop.

I have tried most of the raw converters on the market and as I wrote yesterday this version of Capture One is the best I've ever used. The question is whether I want to go for the extra "complication" of stand alone software, even though it does integrate with Photoshop.  It is very tempting, since some of the files I've produced are very impressive and it does do a very good job with m4/3 files.

Olympus E-PL1 14-150mm

However, using Photoshop and Adobe Camera Raw works very well too. All the files in this post were processed using that combination. I wrote yesterday about the need to expose and "develop" carefully with m4/3, in order to get the best out of it. While I think the criticisms regarding the more limited dynamic range of m4/3 are often overstated, there is no doubt that it is more prone to blown highlights than other larger sensor formats. Particularly when it is also the case that the default metering settings of all the Panasonic and Olympus cameras that I have used have a tendency to over expose for my tastes.

I generally have all my m4/3 cameras set to - 0.7 in terms of exposure compensation, and this, more often than not gives me the exposure that I find most accurate. In fact, I do this with most of my cameras. It happens with both my Nikons and there has been a lot written in forums about how the Nikon D7000 has a tendency to over-expose slightly. While I can understand doing this in point-and-shoot compacts when the users probably won't make any adjustments to the file after taking the shot, it does seem a little strange in cameras that are aimed at a different market.

I'm not advocating deliberate under exposure here, I'm actually talking about getting the exposure correct. There is this theory that with digital cameras, you should expose to avoid having to lift the shadow areas, because thats where noise can be generated. However that does assume that you get the exposure right in the first place. Also using the new Sony 16MP sensor in the NEX-C3, Nikon D7000, Pentax K-5 etc. there are far less problems in exposing for the highlights, as that sensor allows shadow areas to be lightened quite dramatically with no or very little increase in noise.

I wrote a piece on it here:- http://soundimageplus.blogspot.com/2011/01/pentax-k-5-three-lenses-low-iso.html and this image, taken with a Pentax K-5, shows what you can do.

Pentax K-5 15mm F4 lens

Micro Four-Thirds is not quite as forgiving as this, though here's an example where I've lifted the shadows with no great increase in noise.

The other great advantage of continuing to work with Photoshop and Adobe Camera Raw, is familiarity. I feel that I've only begun to scratch the surface with Capture One Pro, and the question is do I want to allocate the time to learning all its possibilities. I have no doubt that this would be a worthwhile exercise but whether I decide to do that remains to be seen.

Olympus E-PL1 14-150mm

Olympus E-PL1 14-150mm

Olympus E-P3 / E-PL1 14-150mm Zoom lens

Olympus E-P3 14-150mm Zoom lens

I've now onto my third 14-150mm. I tend to sell them off as kits with the cameras. I got this one "refurbished" from Olympusmarket on ebay. It actually cost me less than I sold my last one for.

Olympus E-P3 14-150mm Zoom lens 

Its a decent lens. At the 14mm end its actually very good indeed. It suffers, as do many of these superzooms, at the long end, wide open.

Olympus E-P3 14-150mm Zoom lens

Olympus E-PL1 14-150mm Zoom lens

Olympus E-PL1 14-150mm Zoom lens 

I tried it on both the E-P3 and E-PL1 and was interested to see what kind of shutter speeds I could get down to at the long end, with the image stabilisation turned on. 

I managed 1/50th. sec. though not every shot at this speed was sharp.

Olympus E-PL1 14-150mm Zoom lens 

Olympus E-PL1 14-150mm Zoom lens 

It is a very useful lens, and focuses pretty close for a zoom of this size. Its also very light and small until it gets extended. It's cheaper and I think sharper than the Panasonic 14-140mm, though that lens has the best built-in IS system I've ever used.

Olympus E-PL1 14-150mm Zoom lens 

Generally I do prefer lenses with IS rather than in body stabilisation. Maybe its me, but I seem to be able to use them at much slower shutter speeds.

Olympus E-P3 14-150mm Zoom lens

Olympus E-P3 14-150mm Zoom lens

Olympus E-P3 14-150mm Zoom lens

Olympus E-P3 14-150mm Zoom lens

Olympus E-P3 14-150mm Zoom lens

I shot this last one at ISO 12,800. Its actually not that bad. I've got a Sony NEX-C3 coming soon and I'm interested in doing some high ISO comparisons between that and the Olympus.

Olympus E-PL1 14-150mm Zoom lens

Olympus E-P3 14-150mm Zoom lens

Olympus E-PL2 Panoramas - Where is m4/3 headed?

Where is Micro Four Thirds headed?

With the upcoming GF3, heavily leaked this weekend, Panasonic seem to be slowly coming towards a coherent product line that will provide different models for different kinds of photographers. With a range that includes the GF3, G3 and GH2 there are now cameras that will provide for both point and shoot upgraders and DSLR users wanting to downsize without loosing quality.

Though there are still inconsistencies, such as when you add a kit zoom to a GF3 it suddenly gets a lot bigger (though this doesn't seem to be a problem for the Sony NEX), this does seem to be settling down into a more balanced selection of cameras. Panasonic also seem to be quite ruthless in their determination to succeed with this, with the axing of the only recently released GF2.

From all available information, it seems Olympus may be going the same route too.

So we have a range of cameras, and between the two companies a pretty decent set of lenses. The soon to be released 25mm f/1.4 from Panasonic and the probable? 12mm f/2 from Olympus will add more high quality primes to the collection of (mostly) very capable zooms. Panasonic have also proved that they can get excellent results from a 4/3 16MP sensor.

All of this is good news. When the system first appeared, there were basically several versions of the same camera. In a month or two I suspect we will see much more choice, from the very small and pocketable to the more well-specified, but all retaining the idea of small and light without compromising on image quality.

I don't think anyone as yet is in a position to know where this is going to go next. Panasonic and Olympus no longer have the field to themselves. Sony and Samsung are already taking a slice of the market, and others may be preparing to give it a go as well.

To a large extent this will depend on the answers to some questions.

Can Panasonic push the sensor even higher? Sony are obviously ambitious to get their MP count higher for APS-C, and whether they succeed, we'll see soon. So can Panasonic keep up pro-rata? If Sony do produce the rumoured 24MP APS-C can Panasonic come up with a 20MP 4/3 sensor?

Will cameras like the GF3 and the rumoured Olympus "Mini" make serious inroads into the compact point and shoot market? Will Panasonic / Olympus keep the "enthusiasts" happy with their ever diminishing camera design?

If the answer to these questions is yes, then we may expect a bright future for the system. If no then we may get a marginalised product line similar to what 4/3 has become.

Both the m4/3 companies are now in a very real game of leap-frog with their competitors, and they can surely no longer just go their own way. They have to respond to what other manufacturers bring out. This competition will hopefully push them to better products for us all to enjoy. Ultimately, unless we're shareholders in the companies, we can just select what's best for us from whatever is available, and to a certain extent it may not matter whether the system survives or slowly fades away.

If its m4/3 or APS-C does it really matter?   

Olympus E-PL2 Video

Olympus E-PL2 m.Zuiko 14-150mm f/4-5.6 720p edited in iMovie

Easily the best video performance I've yet seen in an Olympus m4/3 camera. This is actually pretty good. The E-P1 and E-P2 were somewhat soft, but this is nice and sharp with good colour. As is usual, nowhere near the flexibility of something like a GH2, but as I've said many times before, is this the point of video enabled stills cameras?

People moan about the lack of full manual control and various broadcast quality features, as if they were using these cameras to shoot some hollywood blockbuster. Some people obviously do use cameras such as this as a budget alternative for some serious filmaking, but the idea of them being a serious alternative to a dedicated video camera has always struck me as like asking for Formula 1 performance in a Nissan Micra!

The great thing is you get seriously good HD quality on many m4/3 cameras, but to expect them to be equipped with the same functionality as a made for the job camera, is asking a lot. Much is made about manual focus and being able to set the aperture manually. This is actually easy to do by buying a manual lens and using an adapter. You can get all sorts of really good manual lenses for m4/3 often at ridiculously cheap prices. I've always found it much easier to use them anyway. I've used MF Nikon lenses on all the Canon and m4/3 cameras I've had, and they work very well.

However this was shot with the 14-150mm zoom, and as you can see its produced some nice crisp footage even at the 150mm end.

Panasonic GH2 - Zoom or Prime?

I've recently sold my Leica Panasonic 14-150mm Vario-Elmar Zoom. Wonderful lens, but big, heavy and bulky. I'm currently using an Olympus m.Zuiko 14-150mm f/4-5.6. There's a test at Dpreview - http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/olympus_m_14-150_4-5p6_o20/ Their conclusion is a bit luke warm. 

"Overall then the 14-150mm is superzoom that delivers a perfectly competent results in a small light package. Its image quality may not please the most critical of photographers, but unless you regularly examine your images at 100% or make large prints (A4 or bigger) its flaws are unlikely to be hugely apparent. In combination with a Pen-series camera it makes a highly flexible general-purpose package with image quality to match an SLR but without the associated bulk. So while it's perhaps not a lens for the purist photographer, for many others it will make a very agreeable travel companion indeed."

I've always thought its actually a pretty decent lens however, and yesterday I did some tests to compare it with what are generally regarded as the two best m4/3 prime lenses. The Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 and Panasonic Leica 45mm f/2.8 macro. 

These are pairs of shots taken on the same camera (A Panasonic GH2) at the same settings and the same focal length. If you click through to flickr there are full size images to view. (Though these are heavily jpg compressed, so expect a few artefacts.)

For some reason most of the pictures taken with the zoom are slightly darker than with the primes but what I see from this is how similar they are. Even when the zoom is wide open. I was certainly expecting to see much more of a difference with the primes producing significantly sharper results. They do look slightly sharper to me but not as much as I would have expected.

Not really a scientific test but one thats actually very useful for me. The primes obviously have other advantages such as wider apertures and macro facility, but for everyday use in good light there seems little advantage in using them. Certainly only a very slight sharpening in Photoshop for the zoom shots would be required to make them look identical.

I always had the feeling that the Olympus 14-150mm was producing good results and it was a factor in my decision to sell the Vario-Elmar. Certainly the Olympus zoom is a pleasure to use, being very light and it also has very fast AF on the GH2. 

So a very useful exercise for me and with a somewhat unexpected result.