Panasonic GF2 - 14mm f/2.5 Review - Part 3 Other lenses

While there's no denying that they look very sexy, this is not really a camera for me to use non-native, non-AF lenses on. Firstly I find the Panasonic LVF1 electronic viewfinder not really up to the job of manually focusing lenses and secondly I find focusing using the screen very fiddly and difficult. The GH2 is much better suited for using such lenses, both in terms of quality and use.





As I've written before, I'm not convinced that the GF1 sensor is good enough to get the benefit from such lenses. Whether there is any improvement on the GF2, I'll see when I do some testing.


The 20mm f/1.7 pancake and 45mm f/2.8 macro lenses both work very well indeed, and like the 14mm take advantage of the faster autofocus on the GF2.


Some camera porn with the 20mm:-









A couple of shots with the 45mm:-






For me the GF2 seems ideally suited for situations when I want to work quietly and unobtrusively. Also times when I don't want to carry a heavy outfit. Though lenses like the M-Mount Zeiss, Leicas and Voigtlanders are small, they aren't particularly light. I've had a painful back for the last week, and anything that takes the strain off it is very welcome.


For my particular uses I think these small prime AF lenses work very well with the GF2. They don't "overwhelm" the body and all work very quickly being native Panasonic lenses. The touchscreen shoot function, whereby you touch the point you want to focus on, and the camera focuses and shoots is very useful. It's something I've been doing on my GH2 and it works well. 


Words - David
Images - David and Ann

Photographic Heaven?

The 5th. and I think final day of this cold winter high pressure weather. Its been a real treat to work in light like this. Today we are forecast to return to the usual UK January gloom.





Its been an interesting period with my unplanned discovery of the wonders of M-mount lenses on my GH2. I've had a smile on my face for a couple of days now, and I'm really pleased with both using these lenses on this camera and looking at the results. Yesterday I used the Voigtlander 25mm f/0.95 Nokton and the Zeiss 50mm f/2 Planar, which is just wonderful. I love working with just two prime lenses and find it liberating and creative. I also don't shoot too many images which I'm liable to do with zoom lenses.





In a forum post last year I wrote about how I imagined that I would be using a GH2 + Voigtlander 25mm f/0.95 Nokton as my main camera lens combination at this time, and so it has proved. 





Its not everybody's ideal m4/3 system, as it's not a light lens, but I find it great to use. So far I'm not missing anything wider, choosing instead to create multi-image pictures. I still have the Olympus 9-18mm zoom, but currently have no inclination to use it. Its a good lens but doesn't have the magic of what I've been using for the past three days. 


For the first time in a long time, I'm happy and satisfied with what I'm using and really don't want to use anything else. This is pleasing and also very surprising. I have enjoyed using "alternative" lenses on m4/3 for some time now and to me it's one of the joys of the system. It has sometimes felt in the past as if I was indulging myself as it was difficult to see the benefits. Not so with the GH2.


I do appreciate that its not everybody's idea of photographic heaven, fiddling around with retro design manual focus lenses, but we all have our little quirks!! For me to be able to do it while at the same time producing some of the highest quality images I've ever got from m4/3, and indeed right up there with the best from any system, is probably the reason I've been smiling so much lately. This time its not heart versus head or what I want to do rather than what I should do. This combination of light, small gear leading to pleasure in the process of picture making and high quality results has taken me a while to find and I've enjoyed it enormously for the last three days. I can't wait to get out and use it again.


Words - David
Images - David and Ann 

More Panasonic GH2 - More M Mount lenses

Panasonic GH2 Voigtlander 75mm f1.8 Heliar Classic


Back when I put together my "review" of the GH2 I did say that I would be having a look at how my M-mount lenses performed on it. However, other than some brief indoor tests with the Zeiss Planar 50mm f/2 - http://soundimageplus.blogspot.com/2010/12/panasonic-gh2-part-6-jpgs-50mm-f2-macro.html - I never got round to it. I've only been doing all this because my 90mm came back from Leica a few days ago and I thought I would see how it performed on the GH2. In the post mentioned I did say that the GH2 seemed to show up the difference in lenses more, but for some reason I never followed that up. I'm sure that was because of the results I got with all the other m4/3 cameras I used. I really couldn't see that M-mount lenses were significantly better than the 4/3 or m4/3 lenses I was using. 


Yesterday I took out the Voigtlander 35mm f/1.4 and 75mm f/1.8, Zeiss 50mm f/2 lenses in addition to the 25mm f/0.95. Just like with the Leica 90mm, they all produced stunning results. 

Panasonic GH2 Zeiss 50mm f/2 Planar

The Zeiss 50mm f/2 Planar was especially good. I took out my 45mm f/2.8 macro lens to compare it with and couldn't believe the difference. The 45mm is a great lens and when I got my second copy recently I was really pleased with the first pictures I took with it. However the Zeiss betters it! I was so surprised by the difference that I went and took more comparison shots to see if what I was seeing was right. It was. I've said before that the Zeiss 50mm is a VERY sharp lens and its certainly the best I've ever used on my Leicas. It is now the best I've ever used on m4/3 as well.

I used the two Voigtlander M-Mount lenses for the first time on the GH2 and both were really good. Very impressive results.

 

Panasonic GH2 Voigtlander 75mm f/1.8

Panasonic GH2 Voigtlander 35mm f/1.4 Multi Image Panoramic Stitch.

I also used the Voigtlander 25mm f/0.95 Nokton which as far as I'm concerned is the best "native" m4/3 lens. I'm going to send a pleading letter to them to make a fast wide-angle!!

I created this image with it.

Panasonic GH2 Voigtlander 25mm f/0.95 Multi Image Panoramic Stitch.

It consists of 28 separate images stitched together in Photoshop. The stitched file was 325MB. That the equivalent of a 114MP sensor!!  The level of detail was unbelievable. However it took a while both to take and to stitch together. 

So why the difference with the GH2?

A good question and one I really don't have an answer to. Is there a weaker anti-aliasing filter on the GH2? I can't say I've seen any comments that would indicate that, though it may be the case. The results I've got from all my Panasonic and Olympus lenses on the GH2 have been a slight improvement over the GH1 in terms of sharpness, though I have noticed that they are somewhat "grainier". This is similar to what the Leica M9 produces. Very sharp images but I usually have to employ a noise reduction programme to smooth out the skies. Maybe it is a weaker AA filter that is doing this or different in-camera processing. All of this refers to raw files by the way. The jpgs the camera produces are very similar to those from other Panasonic cameras. They are less noisy, less "grainy" and slightly softer. Also all pictures are taken at ISO 160, and apertures of f/5.6 to f/11. The majority of the images shown in this series are at f/8. I should also point out that at these apertures I got very little, and in some cases none at all, chromatic aberration or fringing.

Whatever the reason for this increased sharpness, I'm quite excited by what it offers. I've also come up with some Adobe Camera Raw parameters for raw development that give me results very close to the Leica M9. A kind of digital Fuji Velvia look if you like. In addition I'm shooting with what the camera regards as slight underexposure. I've always thought that Panasonic m4/3 cameras work in a kind of "holiday snaps" exposure mode anyway. What they think of as "correct exposure" is way too light for me. The M9 will usually come up with an exposure reading thats about 1 stop below what the Panasonic indicates. I usually have the GH2 set at about -2/3 stop. It gives better highlight detail, contrast and colour saturation, all of which I prefer for landscape photography. 

Though I'm excited by the prospects this can offer, it does pose somewhat of a dilemma, as to what I'm currently using. However I'm going to postpone that debate for a while and just enjoy the results. 

Finally, if this gives the impression that I'm advocating that all GH2 owners immediately rush out and buy expensive m-mount lenses, then I must say very firmly that I'm not. The lenses I'm talking about are all manual focus and some of them, though small, are pretty heavy. Its a fiddly, slow process getting precise focus on these lenses and if you're looking for a fast shooting response to a situation thats moving quickly, these lenses are completely useless for that. As ever these are personal subjective observations.

There are however lots of good S/H lenses out there that compare very favourably in terms of price with the Panasonic and Olympus lenses, which after all aren't particularly cheap. Since its introduction m4/3 has always been a great vehicle for legacy lenses. With the gradual growth of the "native" lens ranges this has become less talked about somewhat, but it still gives m4/3 the widest range of options of any camera system.

Words - David

Images - David and Ann

Micro Four Thirds and Manual Focus Lenses

Delayed by a day because of bad weather I finally got round to my planned trip with the Olympus E-PL1 using manual focus lenses yesterday. It was one of those glorious autumn>winter days with clear light and blue slies. Everywhere was still & though cold, with no wind, it was a pleasure to be out.



My feeling that the E-PL1 would be a good camera to use with manual focus lenses was borne out on location. The layout of the camera does make it a simple and quick procedure. The magnification aid located at the top of the back of the camera is easily accessible with my thumb to switch on and off for focusing & I can do this without removing my finger from the shutter button. This in contrast to the E-P2 which is a good deal more fiddly.

So a good result there, but it does raise the question of "why bother?". Some people are bewildered by this fascination of using old design, manual focus lenses on micro four thirds cameras. Its not as though there aren't good AF lenses available for the system, there are, so the question of why do it is a valid one. Indeed, I've questioned it myself in the past, often wondering why?, but I always seem to be drawn back to going out with a couple of manual focus prime lenses.



Part of it for me is undoubtedly the combination of camera history and aesthetics. I do like retro looking cameras. To me the modern DSLR and most of the compact cameras on the market are soulless plastic (sorry - polycarbonate!) boxes. I get great pleasure from using something that looks and feels different from the current run of the mill. Using the two Zeiss lenses pictured above with the E-PL1 is a very enjoyable experience. Though small, their metal construction gives them a good solid feel. While I realise that the camera is the dreaded polycarbonate, it neither feels or looks like it, and the two lenses match it very well.



Whats has this got to do with creating pictures? you might ask, and the answer is nothing really. Its just personal taste. We all make our choices in terms of the car we drive, the clothes we wear and how we decorate our houses. These choices are determined partly by functionality and economics but also include a large element of personal preference. This may be influenced by many things and may exclude common sense, practicality and consistency. The decisions we make may not always be the right and sensible ones and may be influenced by seemingly trivial criteria, but if we don't allow ourselves these expressions of individuality, then we deny our own unique identity.



Going back to MF lenses, the question is often asked as to whether these alternative lenses provide better image quality. My answer to this is that its pretty marginal. I don't think many photographers would query the quality of Zeiss lenses but using them on m4/3 doesn't mean you get instantly better image quality. It does happen but its far from universal.


The answer as to why I use these is simply, I like using them. It is difficult to put into words all the reasons why I do it. They are much more difficult to use and the whole process is slower, but its something I'm prepared to put up with. Photography is my job and my hobby and I try to make both as enjoyable as possible. Using manual lenses contributes to that and whatever the reasons thats good enough for me.


Words - D
Images - D & A