Spyro P. wrote:
Quick question guys. If I was going to buy this camera I would only use it with manual zone focusing or hyperfocal distance focusing. The things I cant find in the reviews are:
- Do you MF from the lens or the buttons in the back?
- Does the 17mm lens have any focus distance or hyperfocal distance markings? Cant see anything on it.
- Does it show on the screen the distance when focusing manually?
- When the camera is idle and goes to power save mode, does it remember the distance set before when it powers up, or do we have to set it again?
Probably too early to ask these questions, but I was wondering if you've seen it mentioned in any of the reviews floating around. Cant see anything helpful in that regard in dpreview. ...Show more →
Tariq Gibran wrote:
Just noticed that a second gallery has been posted at DPreview of images taken with the 17mm lens. These are jpegs so perhaps the raw will be better but there seems to be some minor CA issues with that lens (noticeable in the first image of the girl with the mini) and strangely, some pretty bad noise in the shadows shot at base ISO (200).
In the second shot, look at the leaves in shadow behind the girl. The noise did not appear this severe in the previous gallery.
Those photos were done in Germany, I assume at the announcement and very likely from a different camera than the London images. It's possible there is still some variation from unit to unit especially if the cameras were early production units (as indicated for the London images). Or very possibly some of the settings between the two were set differently.
Regarding the noise. I agree that the London images have less of that grainy look. The question I have is how much luminance NR was applied to the London images (in camera I assume)? Though it does imply it's possible to turn off much of the in-camera NR if so desired. But at least for me, the luminance noise is not an issue as it often is not nearly as obvious in print compared to on an LCD display. Some additional luminance NR should take care of it. I suspect something with the NR settings was set differently with that camera compared to the London images.
Regarding CA issues. One of the review sites had an interview with one of the Olympus reps who stated that there is a fair amount of lens correction applied in software by the camera. Again, if these are from an early production camera not running the final firmware it's possibly not indicative of what will ship. But that's just a guess.
CKrueger wrote:
I've noticed mirror slap affecting sharpness when doing moon shots at marginal shutter speeds (in the case of sliver moons and eclipses).
I'm sure it's possible to contrive circumstances in which slap is highly exaggerated. Very long lenses on poorly supported cameras would probably be a good recipe, although it's hard to distinguish mirror slap from shutter slap and other movements like wind and wobble. Maybe I haven't seen it because I observe sensible practice in camera support.
>It's especially noticeable when shooting with my 40D in Live View. Using a remote cable release and Live View, I can see vibration when the mirror flips up after an exposure, or if I use the Live View mode which makes the mirror flip before the exposure.
In liveview the mirror is generally up well before the exposure, so there is no mirror slap during exposure. Even so, the dropping of the mirror is very different from the lifting. On return the mirror must strike the hard supports which hold it accurately in place, and the exposure is over so latent vibrations are acceptable. The lifting of the mirror OTOH is heavily damped, which is what all that spongy stuff around the focus screen is for. The spongy stuff is carefully chosen to absorb mirror mass/frequency and transfer little energy to the camera body. Therefore you can't infer anything much about slap during exposure from the effects of the mirror dropping after exposure.
Those are great questions! The initial user remarks at imaging-resource state that the zoom focuses very slowly but that the 17mm pancake is very fast. It also mentions the poor feel of the fly-by-wire manual focusing on the Olympus lenses. One thing that seems very odd to me is that Olympus does not appear to have provided for some sort of visual focus confirmation when focusing manually. There is that big, glowing green light around the shutter button. Why did they not use this light to confirm focus? That would have been very handy and easy to see out of your peripheral vision if you were using a shoe mounted viewfinder. Sigma uses a more discreet light like this for this purpose and it works great. Perhaps Olympus does have some sort of facility for both this and manual focus that has not been written about yet. It would seem a huge oversight on their part if they don't.
Why the Nikon? I'd go the Panasonic 20 or the Oly 17 - they are both designed for this format and very, very small.
There won't be any fast 40-45mm lenses available for this format in the near future, though - that is where you go for a Voigtlander Nokton 40mm or an old Pen 40mm or 42mm...
I've only found the 17 on Amazon so far with preorder at $229 USD. Not sure who it will be coming from (Amazon itself--unlikelY) and that makes a difference to me. Love to order one--though I will almost certainly buy a Panny 20 f/1.7 too--sometime(I'm now suspecting that they will hold this until they announce their other 4/3rds 'smaller' body--so that's a good while off).
Well, nikon or CV are both good candidates, I suspect they have _far_ superior manual focus rings compared to the panasonic/olympus plastic ones, I might be wrong of course.
Is the LP-1 compatible with a remote? On Dpreview it says it's compatible with Remote cable RM-UC1, But I don't see anywhere on the camera where you would plug in the remote?
EOS20 wrote:
Is the LP-1 compatible with a remote? On Dpreview it says it's compatible with Remote cable RM-UC1, But I don't see anywhere on the camera where you would plug in the remote?
Remote on the Oly's plugs into the USB port IIRC. There's no dedicated port (The Panny's take Canon E type miniplug remotes on a dedicated port).
ulrikft wrote:
So, if one wanted a m8-light, what would you guys pair this up with for a walkaround-combo?
I'm thinking something like Pen E-P1 + nikon 24 f/2.0
Other ideas?
I'd wait for the Panasonic 20/1.7. There's a distinct lack of fast normal/wide primes in the entire 4/3rds system. The Nikon 24mm f2 will be fairly large on it due to the stacked adapters (you can essentially add another 27mm to the lens length from adapters).
If I was going for the E-P1 right now, my choice would be a fast 28 in an RF mount, likely the Voigtlander 28/2, or a C mount fast prime with good coverage like the Pentax 25mm f1.4.
For those of you who are thinking about using alternative non AF micro 4/3rds lenses with the E-P1, Is there a method to confirm manual focus when using a shoe mounted viewfinder and not the LCD screen? At the very least, I would hope there is a beep or something when using other lenses. This could really be a big deal for someone trying to use this in a rangefinder style shooting scenario such as candid street photography.
Tariq... you'd probably be better off using hyperfocal technique or pre-focusing. The camera's AF can apparently confirm MF lenses, but I'm not sure if the beep would be quick enough to be useful. If you must shoot with the camera up to your eye, the G1 is probably a better choice. The G1's articulated screen can also be useful for candids.
--unlikelY) and that makes a difference to me. Love to order one--though I will almost certainly buy a Panny 20 f/1.7 too--sometime(I'm now suspecting that they will hold this until they announce their other 4/3rds 'smaller' body--so that's a good while off).