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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Just got the 40mm 1.8 Hexanon (thanks Andy!)

Looks like a great lens for a tenner (plus £30 for the adapter) and pretty small profile too. Not stunningly sharp at 1.8 but gets really sharp by f4

This pic is f4 1/60, ISO 400 - imported into LR3 and nothing else done

P1100611.jpg


Oops didn't spot that bit about when the new firmware comes out. :bonk:
 
grum said:
Just got the 40mm 1.8 Hexanon (thanks Andy!)

Looks like a great lens for a tenner (plus £30 for the adapter) and pretty small profile too. Not stunningly sharp at 1.8 but gets really sharp by f4

This pic is f4 1/60, ISO 400 - imported into LR3 and nothing else done

P1100611.jpg


Oops didn't spot that bit about when the new firmware comes out. :bonk:
Click to expand...

Graham

Do I see an alternative to Andy's statue from his garden :D
 
Richie15 said:
Worth trying your D90 at a FL of 25mm (approx 32.5mm FF) and then compare the kit lens (14-45) with the same shot at 16mm. I think you will be shocked :D
Click to expand...

Hi Richie, as I have not committed to the GF1 yet . . . I cant try the experiment you suggest? Would you mind telling me just how much better the 14-45 is??? Or are you suggesting the D90 is not that hot?

At the moment I'm going around in circles in my head . . . :bang: An explanation of where you are coming from in your head would help . . . :)

CJS
 
I'm getting mixed messages, GF1, shoot RAW . . . JPG can be disappointing?

How are you present owners finding this?

Are you using 'Adobe Camera RAW', or the RAW program supplied with the camera?

In other words are there any problems in shooting RAW or JPG.

One review I saw seemed to be having a problem metering into the sun, one assumes he understood compensation?:thinking:

CJS
 
Bought the GF1 +20mm lens, what a super camera I found it was , so sold all my D90 gear and don't regret it at all.

I only shoot jpg, and find no problems with the results ...
Have bought the 14 - 45mm Kit lens and find it an absolutely cracker of a lens.

So no disapointment here.
 
oldboy2000 said:
Bought the GF1 +20mm lens, what a super camera I found it was , so sold all my D90 gear and don't regret it at all.

I only shoot jpg, and find no problems with the results ...
Have bought the 14 - 45mm Kit lens and find it an absolutely cracker of a lens.

So no disapointment here.
Click to expand...

ditto the above though i sold a d200 and a d40 and i bought the G1 because of the viewfinder. it is an excellent camera...
 
CJS said:
I'm getting mixed messages, GF1, shoot RAW . . . JPG can be disappointing?

How are you present owners finding this?

Are you using 'Adobe Camera RAW', or the RAW program supplied with the camera?

In other words are there any problems in shooting RAW or JPG.

One review I saw seemed to be having a problem metering into the sun, one assumes he understood compensation?:thinking:

CJS
Click to expand...

I'm currently using the Lightroom 3 beta with RAW files - very happy indeed with the results. The jpegs aren't bad by any means but the RAW files are much better imo. I sometime like to do quite a bit of processing too and the RAW files can take it a lot better.

I've just come into some money very unexpectedly! :)

Shall I buy the 45-200 - or wait for the 100-300? Anyone seen how much it is likely to cost when it comes out?
 
Last edited:
ianhl said:
ditto the above though i sold a d200 and a d40 and i bought the G1 because of the viewfinder. it is an excellent camera...
Click to expand...

Yes thats a dilemma I have . . . GF1 or G1 (same camera internal) apart from the 'view finder' and vid? I might look at the GH1??? get some great boat fishing footage, fighting 'Moby Dick':cool: Can I live with out a viewfinder and a bonus, the animated screen . . . getting down and dirty, cant do it these days?

Twenty years, loyal to Nikon, looks like it might all go down the pan . . . :crying:

Anyone got an answer on the RAW, ACR or PinkSilk as supplied with camera, I think its called pinksilk?

Its all about size and weight . . . . I want is a new 'man bag' of a size and shape that will take my personal tat, no make up:banana:!!!!:D and a small pouch to take the new camera, drop in the man bag, hay-presto, man bag/tat/camera always with me?

CJS
 
grum said:
I'm currently using the Lightroom 3 beta with RAW files - very happy indeed with the results. The jpegs aren't bad by any means but the RAW files are much better imo. I sometime like to do quite a bit of processing too and the RAW files can take it a lot better.

I've just come into some money very unexpectedly! :)

Shall I buy the 45-200 - or wait for the 100-300? Anyone seen how much it is likely to cost when it comes out?
Click to expand...

Graham

What are you going to use the long zoom for?
 
Hi Rich, mainly for wildlife stuff I guess - maybe some landscape things.

Got the 14-45 and 20mm at the mo, plus a load of MF lenses. Got a Tokina Canon FD fit 70-210 which I enjoyed using at a wildlife park but focussing manually on a lens that long is a bit of a PITA.
 
grum said:
Hi Rich, mainly for wildlife stuff I guess - maybe some landscape things.

Got the 14-45 and 20mm at the mo, plus a load of MF lenses. Got a Tokina Canon FD fit 70-210 which I enjoyed using at a wildlife park but focussing manually on a lens that long is a bit of a PITA.
Click to expand...

Graham

My view and I am sure others will have a different view is that as long as the subject doesnt move then I think either the 45-200 or the 100-300 will be ok. Before I sold my D300 I shot Woburn on a specialist photography course and was using a 80-200 2.8, that was with a DX sensor which is roughly 1.33x crop factor. The focal length was a bit short and I could have used a 1.4x TC, so ideally a FF equiv focal length would be 400mm, so the 45-200mm would be spot on. Most shots were taken between F4 and F8.

My only concern would be how the AFC setting (assuming the subject moves) would stand up on the GF1 which I understand is not great. I also question the IQ, when I had a brief go with the 45-200 was no-where near as good as the 14-45 (which by the way you take stunning shots with!)

I would try one out before you buy.

Hope this helps
 
CJS said:
Hi Richie, as I have not committed to the GF1 yet . . . I cant try the experiment you suggest? Would you mind telling me just how much better the 14-45 is??? Or are you suggesting the D90 is not that hot?

At the moment I'm going around in circles in my head . . . :bang: An explanation of where you are coming from in your head would help . . . :)

CJS
Click to expand...

The GF1 has often been described as a mini Leica...I will let others comment on that.

Can the GF1 replace your D90, depends of what photography you enjoy, if you are into action and moving subjects, keep your Nikon - the focus system on the Nikon is superb and will not be beaten, alternatively some also have an SLR to complement the GF1 (ask Bl0at3r). What glass are you using? If you shoot at high ISO, keep your Nikon, the GF1 will not keep up.

The GF1 is a totally different kettle of fish to the D90 and has a crop factor of 2x rather than 1.3x for your DX D90, you need to consider this when looking at lenses.

The killer for me the the IQ, I had a D300 with a 12-24, 17-55, 105 and 80-200 and sold the lot. For me the IQ that I can get out of a RAW file is far better than I ever got from my D300, particularly in relation to sharpness and colour.

My advice is take a memory card to your local Jessops and take some RAW pics at various settings, then take them home and process them through Lightroom and see what you think.
 
OK Richie, thank you I'm understanding where you are coming from.

My pictures are very general, not sporty, no children or pets. I like to go out, but not on a mission to take pictures, just go about my daily life, a walk, boat fishing trip, shopping in the town, boring stuff . . . something comes up of interest, light is right, have time and I can stop, its picture time for 15 minutes . . . then get on with what I was doing. . . :)

So heaving DSLR kit around on the off-chance is becoming a drag as I get older. A real irritation in ones old age is not being able to 'get down a dirty', I like low angle shots.

Keeping a limited DSLR kit seems an option? Sell on eBay: D40x, 18-200VRmkII, Sigma 10-20mm. Keep D90, Nikon 18-70mm and 50mm prime + macro tubes and a Sigma 70-300HSM.

Because I like 'low angle shots', I'm torn, the G1 or GH1 might be better, 'swivel screen'? New G2 might prompt a price drop on the GH1? But the GF1 may handle better? Not keen on touch screens, mucky, in precise in the small size we are dealing with, especially when you have sausages for fingers like mine:LOL:

. . . As you say, Jessops. Next Tuesday, hospital in the morning, a couple of hours frustrating the assistant in the afternoon is a distinct possibility? Of course, the sale of the D90 etc, as well, would leave extra cash, or keep the D40x/18-70mm as the DSLR back up, releasing extra cash (I'm particularly comfortable with the D40x)? The 50mm Nikon prime and Sigma 70-300 are worth so little in cash but worth a lot to me, back garden macro lenses;) . . . If I keep a DSLR body, which ever, they will stay . . . I think?

If I'm truthful, I am not a dedicated 'tog type', but I like taking quality pictures, thats by my standards, trying to do better than snapshots?:LOL: Twenty years ago I needed SLR quality for publication right up until 2003 . . . now its just for fun, dont even print pictures out these days, just enjoy then on the computer, do as little as possible in PS Elements v.8, life is to short . . . ;)

So any thoughts to help are appreciated from any quarter.

CJS

PS see my profile lists a D80, moved to the D90 in Jan.,! could not see the small info screen on the D80 to well any more. I still prefer the balance of the pictures I took with the D80 . . . perhaps thats why I like the D40x. its a cut down (and light) D80.
 
Last edited:
CJS said:
OK Richie, thank you I'm understanding where you are coming from.

My pictures are very general, not sporty, no children or pets. I like to go out, but not on a mission to take pictures, just go about my daily life, a walk, boat fishing trip, shopping in the town, boring stuff . . . something comes up of interest, light is right, have time and I can stop, its picture time for 15 minutes . . . then get on with what I was doing. . . :)

So heaving DSLR kit around on the off-chance is becoming a drag as I get older. A real irritation in ones old age is not being able to 'get down a dirty', I like low angle shots.

Keeping a limited DSLR kit seems an option? Sell on eBay: D40x, 18-200VRmkII, Sigma 10-20mm. Keep D90, Nikon 18-70mm and 50mm prime + macro tubes and a Sigma 70-300HSM.

Because I like 'low angle shots', I'm torn, the G1 or GH1 might be better, 'swivel screen'? New G2 might prompt a price drop on the GH1? But the GF1 may handle better? Not keen on touch screens, mucky, in precise in the small size we are dealing with, especially when you have sausages for fingers like mine:LOL:

. . . As you say, Jessops. Next Tuesday, hospital in the morning, a couple of hours frustrating the assistant in the afternoon is a distinct possibility? Of course, the sale of the D90 etc, as well, would leave extra cash, or keep the D40x/18-70mm as the DSLR back up, releasing extra cash (I'm particularly comfortable with the D40x)? The 50mm Nikon prime and Sigma 70-300 are worth so little in cash but worth a lot to me, back garden macro lenses;) . . . If I keep a DSLR body, which ever, they will stay . . . I think?

If I'm truthful, I am not a dedicated 'tog type', but I like taking quality pictures, thats by my standards, trying to do better than snapshots?:LOL: Twenty years ago I needed SLR quality for publication right up until 2003 . . . now its just for fun, dont even print pictures out these days, just enjoy then on the computer, do as little as possible in PS Elements v.8, life is to short . . . ;)

So any thoughts to help are appreciated from any quarter.

CJS

PS see my profile lists a D80, moved to the D90 in Jan.,! could not see the small info screen on the D80 to well any more. I still prefer the balance of the pictures I took with the D80 . . . perhaps thats why I like the D40x. its a cut down (and light) D80.
Click to expand...

CJS

Given the photography you are doing the GF1 is an ideal choice partnered with the 14-45. With regard to the low angle stuff the GF1 has an optional extra in the LVF1, which is a viewfinder that can be slotted into the hot shoe on top. This can then be twisted upwards, so that you dont have to lie flat on the floor. I think if you go for the GH1 or G1 it will be to big and more the size of your D40x which is not what you are after, yes the screen would be useful but I think the size would hinder you and provide little benefit.

With regard to your SLR stuff I would sell one camera at a time and see how you get on with the GF1, there seems little point in getting rid of both straight away. I had a D40x and loved it, seriously under-rated. The only problem with keeping this and the 18-70 is that you will loose AF which will be a pain. If it were me, I would sell your D90 and all your lenses with the exception of your 50mm prime and your 10-20. The 10-20 for landscape is a cracking lens in manual focus mode and will work well on your D40x. I would then get a GF1 to F Mount adapter so that you can use both of these lenses on your GF1. Adapters are dirt cheap on ebay and a lot of fun.

If you are interested in macro, then the Canon 50mm (100mm equiv) f3.5 macro (with ext tubes) is a good bet, yes you will need an adapter but should be all in for £100.

I think you will sell the D40x over time but I may be wrong.......

Let me know how you get on.
 
grum said:
I'm currently using the Lightroom 3 beta with RAW files - very happy indeed with the results. The jpegs aren't bad by any means but the RAW files are much better imo. I sometime like to do quite a bit of processing too and the RAW files can take it a lot better.

I've just come into some money very unexpectedly! :)

Shall I buy the 45-200 - or wait for the 100-300? Anyone seen how much it is likely to cost when it comes out?
Click to expand...

I shoot both RAW and jpg, since LR doesnt see the in-camera film modes and i like the dynamic B&W plus a few of the colour modes.
Silkypix is naffer than a naff thing on a naff day.

Buy the 45-200 then i can have a go with it ;)

need to find my Mojo, its done a runner big time and im struggling to find any incentive to take pics. Increase in pain isnt helping.
 
Sorry to hear you are having more trouble with the pain - any news on the treatment front? Was thinking of going on a gentle bike ride this Sunday if you're up for it?

Ah sod it - where's the current best price on the 45-200? :)

Edit: too late - just ordered one!!


My only concern would be how the AFC setting (assuming the subject moves) would stand up on the GF1 which I understand is not great. I also question the IQ, when I had a brief go with the 45-200 was no-where near as good as the 14-45 (which by the way you take stunning shots with!)

I would try one out before you buy.

Hope this helps
Click to expand...

Thanks Richie :) - not sure about the bit about the AFC setting - tbh I've not really used it much with the 14-45. I've seen some pretty good pics with the 45-200 but some people complain of softness at longer focal lengths.
 
Last edited:
grum said:
Sorry to hear you are having more trouble with the pain - any news on the treatment front? Was thinking of going on a gentle bike ride this Sunday if you're up for it?
Click to expand...

was due to see a neurologist on Tuesday down in Chester, but thanks to the volcano he got stuck in Toronto :bang:

May be up for a ride on Sunday, take my mind of every thing.

Ah sod it - where's the current best price on the 45-200? :)

Edit: too late - just ordered one!!
.
Click to expand...

lol. going to get my self the 45-200 in the summer, should be good for holidays along with some more Extreme III SD cards.
 
What lenses are you guys using for "ultra" wide angle on the GF1? The Pana 7-14mm is way too expensive for me, although I've noticed there is an Olympus 9-18mm which seems to work on the GF1 with an adapter? Would that be better than a Sigma 10-20mm with adapter? Would both autofocus as well?

I wouldn't mind a wide prime either, but there seems to be a distinct lack of those around.
 
Let me know if you fancy it Robb - might have my new lens by then. :)

Weiran - I've not had a chance to try it yet but I got an Olympus wide angle adapter and a step up ring to go on the 14-45. Saw some examples someone had posted and it looked pretty good for a tenner - they reckoned it made it about 11mm equivalent.

The 9-18 would autofocus - don't think the Sigma would?
 
Thanks grum, do you have a link to the post of the examples? And which adapter they used?
 
I know that everybody raves about the 20mm lens but at the present time I only have the 14-45mm and IMHO is is a really good lens.:clap:

At the moment I seem to be using the live view 99% of the time and am beginning to wish I had bought the 45-200mm instead of getting the ELV but I got it as I seem to have the same problem as CJS in that getting low down is getting more and more of difficult. (In most cases):p

So far I have not missed using the D300 one little bit.(y)
 
Richie15 said:
CJS

Given the photography you are doing the GF1 is an ideal choice partnered with the 14-45. With regard to the low angle stuff the GF1 has an optional extra in the LVF1, which is a viewfinder that can be slotted into the hot shoe on top. This can then be twisted upwards, so that you dont have to lie flat on the floor. I think if you go for the GH1 or G1 it will be to big and more the size of your D40x which is not what you are after, yes the screen would be useful but I think the size would hinder you and provide little benefit.

With regard to your SLR stuff I would sell one camera at a time and see how you get on with the GF1, there seems little point in getting rid of both straight away. I had a D40x and loved it, seriously under-rated. The only problem with keeping this and the 18-70 is that you will loose AF which will be a pain. If it were me, I would sell your D90 and all your lenses with the exception of your 50mm prime and your 10-20. The 10-20 for landscape is a cracking lens in manual focus mode and will work well on your D40x. I would then get a GF1 to F Mount adapter so that you can use both of these lenses on your GF1. Adapters are dirt cheap on ebay and a lot of fun.

If you are interested in macro, then the Canon 50mm (100mm equiv) f3.5 macro (with ext tubes) is a good bet, yes you will need an adapter but should be all in for £100.

I think you will sell the D40x over time but I may be wrong.......

Let me know how you get on.
Click to expand...

Thanks for taking the time to answer my ramblings Richie. It helps a lot, see 'wood for trees' and all that, I have not got money to spare so a different view is always helpful (y)

I love the D40x, 18-70mm combination, it is the motorised DX version so auto focus is available, here is a link to a picture I took this morning with this combination, the flower is no more than 3 or 4mm in diameter!

http://www.focal-pla.net/Gallery/displayimage.php?pid=5237&fullsize=1

Just me playing about, would it work . . . ?

All good food for thought, read the reviews, body/lenses . . . next step plague Jessops . . . (y)

CJS
 
Last edited:
CJS said:
Thanks for taking the time to answer my ramblings Richie. It helps a lot, see 'wood for trees' and all that, I have not got money to spare so a different view is always helpful (y)

I love the D40x, 18-70mm combination, it is the motorised DX version so auto focus is available, here is a link to a picture I took this morning with this combination, the flower is no more than 3 or 4mm in diameter!

http://www.focal-pla.net/Gallery/displayimage.php?pid=5237&fullsize=1

Just me playing about, would it work . . . ?

All good food for thought, read the reviews, body/lenses . . . next step plague Jessops . . . (y)

CJS
Click to expand...

Nice one Cliff it's up there at you usual standard.:clap:
 
Further to my 'dilema' thread clicky I have decided that the GF-1 is the body for me.

Now I have a different dilema... the 20mm prime, or the 14-45 kit lens ?


I can't afford both at the moment, and I'm a little worried that the 20mm would be a bit restricting in what I could use it for.

Which did you go for first, and why ???
 
amnesia said:
Further to my 'dilema' thread clicky I have decided that the GF-1 is the body for me.

Now I have a different dilema... the 20mm prime, or the 14-45 kit lens ?


I can't afford both at the moment, and I'm a little worried that the 20mm would be a bit restricting in what I could use it for.

Which did you go for first, and why ???
Click to expand...

Went for 20mm.
Being using just that since i got the camera back in November.
Cracking lens and will teach you lots about framing
 
amnesia said:
Further to my 'dilema' thread clicky I have decided that the GF-1 is the body for me.

Now I have a different dilema... the 20mm prime, or the 14-45 kit lens ?


I can't afford both at the moment, and I'm a little worried that the 20mm would be a bit restricting in what I could use it for.

Which did you go for first, and why ???
Click to expand...

I went for the 14-45mm simply due to it having I S. also as I thought it a little more versatile.
 
Just got a Konica Hexanon 50mm 1.7 to go with the 40mm pancake I got off AndyWest.

Woooweee this thing is sharp!!!!!

P1100689.jpg


Trying to post some crops but my internet is being rubbish.

Edit:

P1100689-1.jpg


P1100689-2.jpg


P1100689-3.jpg
 
Last edited:
One thing that has surprised me is how much you can boost the contrast and lighten shots without them descending into a noisy mess. My Canon 20D files can't be processed to the same extent and from what I've seen on the net neither can the 7D's.

I'd have thought that a relatively small sensor which is relatively crowded would have meant problems when over doing the PP. I wonder how Panasonic have done it? Voodoo?
 
Hello all,

I've been going over and over in my head about getting a GF1 as a second camera.........is it really that good and worth the price with the pancake lens?

I've seen people saying they will replace their DSLR with one..........is it seriously that good?

I've read online that the body has no stabalisation, does this have a big effect in actual use?

Thanks
 
In body IS would be nice and although the 20mm f1.7 hasn't got IS some other lenses have.

I see my GF1 as a modern alternative to the sort of quality 35mm cameras we had years ago but some seem happy to replace their DSLR's. To be honest, the IQ from my GF1 and 20mm f1.7 is probably better then I get from my Canon 20D as a few recent snaps in Whitby and heavy post capture processing have shown me.
 
Last edited:
Oh sod it... GF-1 and 20mm on its way :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top