Picked up my new camera today....a GF1

Status
Not open for further replies.
bl0at3r said:
I have started a thread in the Photo Sharing section.

Show off your best shots taken with your GF1 (y)

See if we can get that upto 33 pages !!!

GF1 Domination of TP (y)
Click to expand...
That sounds like a good mission boss!
 
In the Pen thread Northern Nikon posted a link to a couple of reviews and in one of them the GF1 JPEG's take a bit of a kicking.

Maybe I have low standards but I don't think they're that bad at all. I think that the colours can be a bit rich, as can those from my LX2, but on the whole I think that the GF1 produces reasonably acceptable JPEG's. In fact, they're probably better than those my Canon 20D produces. I have actually been thinking about giving up RAW and switching to JPEG recently as I don't seem to be doing much to RAW files.

And...there's always the different film styles to choose from.
 
I have actually been thinking about giving up RAW and switching to JPEG
Click to expand...

Totally agree with that one. raw is for those with too much time on their hands. Nail it right in the first place. Does anyone remember back in the good old days of Velvia? 50 ISO, a couple of stops latitude, guess the colour temperature and try to match with a filter , focus manually, average metering............blimey! Amazes me how anything ever came out.

Incidentally. this morning Eureka moment. I keep reading that manufacturers, Sigma for instance list their 18-50mm F2/.8 as a Micro 4/3 lens. well O.K. if you don't mind shooting wide open because this lens and the Nikon 12-24mm have no aperture control ( G mounts ) . But this morning I was playing around with the Sigma mounted to the Novaflex mount, lo and behold turning the blue ring on the mount changed the exposure. Wonderful, apeture control. Simple quick mental arithmetic to assess the relative aperture and two rather expensive zooms have been saved from the wheelie bin.

I thought the " blue" ring was a decorative feature.

The £169 I paid for the mount suddenly seems a bargain.:)

Brian.
 
Good save there Brian.

A bit of a ramble...

I was looking at one of my first shots with my GF1 last night. It was taken at ISO 800 and something like f11. Those settings maybe should raise concern but the picture when viewed as a whole image is perfectly acceptable and the dof is extensive, as I wanted it to be, and the shot is sharp too. With clever post capture processing (and I just haven't bothered) I'm sure that the shot could look even better.

I don't honestly think that I could have got the technical quality of that shot so easily and so quickly from any compact film camera I've ever owned. I know that I haven't owned that many compared to some here but I was impressed anyway.

Looking at that shot and thinking about it made me even more convinced that MFT is a game changer.

Also, I do think that sometimes too much is made of noise and diffraction and that sometimes people get too carried away with extreme pixel peeping and forget that the point is to capture an image.
 
BrianT said:
But this morning I was playing around with the Sigma mounted to the Novaflex mount, lo and behold turning the blue ring on the mount changed the exposure. Wonderful, apeture control. Simple quick mental arithmetic to assess the relative aperture and two rather expensive zooms have been saved from the wheelie bin.
Click to expand...

Oh Brian, I told you in the pub that you could do that! The problem is that the ring doesn't have any stops on it, so like you say you have to do a bit of mental arithmatic to try and figure out what aperture you've actual set it to.
 
woof woof said:
Also, I do think that sometimes too much is made of noise and diffraction and that sometimes people get too carried away with extreme pixel peeping and forget that the point is to capture an image.
Click to expand...

I totally agree with you there, but you can still get even more out of the camera with a little knowledge and experience.

What lens were you using for the above example? If it were the 20mm, 99% of the time to don't have to stop down anywhere near as far as f:11. f:5.6 gives you depth of field from 2.5m to infinity when focused at around 4.75m.

I rarely go above f:4 that very reason.
 
I was using the 20mm f1.7 which is my only lens and might remain so.

In my defence it was one of my first shots and I didn't really take into account the greater dof of 4/3. I just set it as I would have set the 20mm on my DSLR. OK, I got a lot of things wrong...but it was a worthwhile experiment. :LOL:
 
Beautiful set of night shots of Annapurna here taken with the GF1 and 20mm

http://craigmod.com/journal/annapurna_moonrise/

annapurna_south_01.jpg
 
Barney I have enough trouble keeping up with your beer intake sod the technical stuff.

Re Woof and his noise etc. Does anyone remember Tri X rated at 1600 ASA dev'd in hot soup...........noise? Oh go away.

Brian.
 
a few shots taken at my sister-in laws on her 25th wedding anniversary...all with 20mm 1.7 @ 800iso & available light only...converted in cs4
4319035472_59cf23fc92.jpg

4319035704_27c85d0885.jpg

4318303311_a1066dcb60.jpg

4318304095_0217e7a62c.jpg

4319037036_08a3962b30.jpg

4319036480_5531949dfa.jpg
 
Barney, you will have to excuse me but I don't quite remember it that way.

Three snaps with the Sigma 18-50mm. But in order of appearance 100 ISO, 800 and 1600. Straight from the camera apart from re-sizing.

stamps021800x450.jpg


stamps022800x450.jpg


stamps023800x450.jpg


Brian.
 
i love b&w & my GF1 is set to RAW + fine jpg b&w standard so i can see at a glance what the RAW shot will look like when processed....great little camera:):)
 
nothing wrong with the jpegs from the GF1 if you stay 800iso & below
 
Ah...........but have I put them in the right order?

I have read that the Jpegs from the Olympus are better straight from the camera, I don't see how.

Again Sigma 18-50mm

cupboard.jpg


These colours are Oh so accurate. ( Spyder Pro calibrated monitor) Again no fa...ing about with processing..


Brian.
 
Last edited:
love b&w & my GF1 is set to RAW + fine jpg b&w standard so i can see at a glance what the RAW shot will look like when processed....great little camera
Click to expand...

Trevor does that mean you process the raw to look like the Jpeg? Mmmmmmmmmm.

Brian.
 
I'd just like to say that it's good to know that I'm not the only one who takes pictures of stuff in cupboards. All I need now is for someone to admit to taking a picture of the inside of their fridge to make me feel completely normal.
 
I'll have you know sometimes I even venture as far as the drive.

mini.jpg


First attempt with the 12-24mm Nikkor.

And it's snowing again.

Brian
 
no Brian......some shots suit b&w & some are better in colour like the shots above that were not great in colour with the very low flouresent lighting but i knew as i was taking them that they would work as b&w conversions
 
Last edited:
And only two months ago.

Hi

I'm a complete novice at photography and a bit of a leave on auto and point and shoot stage at the moment.

I am trying to learn more now and experimenting. But i'd like to replace my old digital camera and would like some advice on my next camera.

I think i'd like to purchase a dSLR with some scope for growth as i learn.

Budget for Initial kit camera and Lenses about £600 Maybe more if i can get Intrerest free or buy now pay later deal.
Click to expand...

And they say a fortnight is a long time in politics.:)

Brian.
 
woof woof said:
I'd just like to say that it's good to know that I'm not the only one who takes pictures of stuff in cupboards. All I need now is for someone to admit to taking a picture of the inside of their fridge to make me feel completely normal.
Click to expand...

Hehehe - been there, done that (y)(y)

3827390568_2d69ef4006.jpg


3833895931_35470a0629.jpg


Not with the delightful GF1 yet though :D
 
britco said:
a few shots taken at my sister-in laws on her 25th wedding anniversary...all with 20mm 1.7 @ 800iso & available light only...converted in cs4
Click to expand...

These family candid type shots in B&W look splendid - exactly the type of stuff I envisage the GF1 will be popular for - being very unobtrusive
 
If anyone is still looking for a small bag to house their precious GF1 with 20mm pancake (or maybe some other small lenses attached)

I have just bought this

186342.jpg


Still a little bigger than I was hoping for - but nearly there - and for £7.99 it is a hundred times better than the sock I have been using for the last few days!

The GF1 is approx 12.5 x 7 x 7 and the bag internal dimensions are 12.5 x 10.5 x 7cm

Even it it says 'Matsui' on it !! I ain't no brand snob (y)(y)
 
Last edited:
Spare Battery bought from Amazon £24.99 inc P&P Works on all Firmware and Guaranteed for 3 years.
 
oldboy2000 said:
Spare Battery bought from Amazon £24.99 inc P&P Works on all Firmware and Guaranteed for 3 years.
Click to expand...

I got mine for £17.99, there's a link on this thread somewhere....bit late now though!! :)
 
I was having a tidy up in the study ( playroom) and decided to try the Epson 2440 to see if the inks had blocked. I was pleasantly surprised....they hadn't, and it's got to be at least a year since it was last used. This got me into wondering. How many prints of a decent size, say A4/A3 does the average guy turn out? Me? About 8 every two years.............when the lounge gets re-decorated is about it.

I then tried the Epson 4990, that worked, one day I might find something for it to do.

I fell over my Spyder calibration thing and wondered how many use one and how often.

What's this got to do with the GF1? Nothing really but the lounge is due for a lick over and.........

Brian.

P.S. Like the knife rack piccie Rich.
 
Last edited:
Brian, the biggest financial booboo I've made photographically speaking was to pay £350 on a printer four years ago. Add the cost of ink and paper and I'll have spent over £400 easily. How much would I have spent if I'd had the prints printed? I doubt it would have been over £50.

At the same time I also paid a similar amount on a flatbed scanner. This was too scan in all my negs and transparencies. In four years I've scanned 1 film, poorly. I never realised that scanning took so much time. I wouldn't mind if the thng came with additional negs holders so I could at least set the next set up while one is scanning. I doubt Epson would be able to supply additional negs holders now, but I may just give them a call.

I've never calibrated my monitor. Maybe I should, but if I need to I know where I can borrow one so no need to buy one of those.

I invested a bit of time in going through my files from 2009 and selecting the best to upload on my LCD picture frames. It was worth the effort, I just need to do 2002-2008 now. This is one area of photography where it certain pays to 'clean as you go'.

My wife bought me a picture frame for my brithday in Septemeber. I keep getting nagged to put some prints in it. I think I should really, but then I'll have to clear the cupboard under the stairs out to get to my tool box to hang the bloody thing up, and that would take half a day at least.

How come photography takes so much bloody time when you're hardly behind the lens for any time at all? :thinking:
 
Yep Barney we seem to be on the same wavelength re scanners/printers. In fact I think scanning must be the single biggest pain in the arse, photographically speaking. My scanner is the Epson 4990 should you wish to borrow some neg carriers.

I think my biggest boboo financially was 7/8 years ago, bought a Nikon film scanner for about £5/600 used it once and...............gave up film and went totally digital.

Mind you about 2 years ago because of a pathological dislike of DSLRs I dusted off a Leica, bought some film and the processing stuff, bought the 4990 and off we went. Halfway through scanning the first film I suddenly remembered why I had gone digital.:wacky:

Ah well, it's only money.

Brian.
 
AndyWest said:
I got mine for £17.99, there's a link on this thread somewhere....bit late now though!! :)
Click to expand...

Andy can you remember where from? Can't seem to find it in the thread now.

Ta.

Tried printing out a couple of pics round at my mum's last night and I'm pretty impressed - though I seem to have made everything a bit too dark on my laptop screen.

My mum's partner is now considering trading in his Nikon SLR for a GF1 :)
 
grum said:
Andy can you remember where from? Can't seem to find it in the thread now.

Ta.
:)
Click to expand...

It's in this thread somewhere, I'll go look. Give me a few mins.

In the mean time GORGE on my GF1 fitted with Voigtlander Ultron 35mm f1.7 lens mmmmmmmmmmm!



 
Voigtlander Ultron 35mm f1.7 Image examples:

Example images: The light was dull dull dull but the detail in the piggy when zoomed in 100% is great so on a sunny day this lens is going to be awesome!

1: No Post Processing.
Piggy_noPP_800pix.jpg


2: Little Lightroom Processing
Vase_tinyPP_800pix.jpg


3: Little Lightroom Processing
DeadReath_tinyPP_800pix.jpg
 
grum said:
Thanks very much!

That lens looks pretty damn sexy - dare I ask how much it cost? :)
Click to expand...

180 beer tokens and i got it from the UK which was a nice touch! :D
 
As you say Alan but it's fun...........unless of course you get serious.

But I am interested in how many of those contributing to this thread who own and of more importance use a top quality printer. Also how many calibrate their monitors, and for those who do how oftenh. As I understand it the majority advocate shooting in raw and processing but after that what do they do with these wonderful files?

So far with printers we have Barney and I who own but don't do and Grum who borrows his Mum's.

Me? All in Jpegs and everything more or less in idiot mode, then a slideshow on the TV, followed by a dusty drawer.

Brian.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top