Help on getting a 4/3 system
- Thread starter remesy
- Start date
between gf1,epl1, i would consider the ep2 also
here's my thoughts as i hv also tried them out at courts where u can feel them
gf1
i have seen it bundled with the panasonic 20 f/1.7 pancake len.
the body feels sturdy and the controls are decent.
epl1
it comes with the 14-42 kit len, which i personally feel is more versatile to use if u r still explorin or rather jus prefer a 'normal' cam to use.
the body feel sturdy too, but i dun like the controls.
too many buttons , the availablilty of art filters makes it a fun cam to use compare to gf1
ep2
either with 14-42 or the 17 f/2.8 len
it has 8 art filters, 2 more than epl1 or ep1.
i prefer the controls of this to epl1.
overall, i would get ep2 for ard the same price as gf1.
i would get epl1 if i'm low on budget, but even tat, i would consider ep1 as i prefer the dial controls
here's my thoughts as i hv also tried them out at courts where u can feel them
gf1
i have seen it bundled with the panasonic 20 f/1.7 pancake len.
the body feels sturdy and the controls are decent.
epl1
it comes with the 14-42 kit len, which i personally feel is more versatile to use if u r still explorin or rather jus prefer a 'normal' cam to use.
the body feel sturdy too, but i dun like the controls.
too many buttons , the availablilty of art filters makes it a fun cam to use compare to gf1
ep2
either with 14-42 or the 17 f/2.8 len
it has 8 art filters, 2 more than epl1 or ep1.
i prefer the controls of this to epl1.
overall, i would get ep2 for ard the same price as gf1.
i would get epl1 if i'm low on budget, but even tat, i would consider ep1 as i prefer the dial controls
Panasonic Lumix G-series and Olympus PEN E-series are all micro 4/3 (normally written as m4/3) and not 4/3 cameras.
M4/3 and 4/3 lens mounts are not the same and not interchangeable.
LEW
I would suggest you not rush your purchase.
It is clear that you need to research what exactly a 4/3 or m4/3 system entails. Are you looking for bokeh that many CSers appear to lust for? If so, then m4/3 may not be the best option for you due to the smaller sensor. And there are other things too. Relatively weaker high ISO performance is another one.
Things like that don't surface when you compare specs.
Research carefully. Don't end up selling your camera a week after you buy it.
It is clear that you need to research what exactly a 4/3 or m4/3 system entails. Are you looking for bokeh that many CSers appear to lust for? If so, then m4/3 may not be the best option for you due to the smaller sensor. And there are other things too. Relatively weaker high ISO performance is another one.
Things like that don't surface when you compare specs.
Research carefully. Don't end up selling your camera a week after you buy it.
1. Good advice - don't rush in to buy. Read up all you can in CS on m4/3, 4/3 section.
2. Not true smaller sensor got no bokeh. See picture below taken with Lumix G-1 (old model).
The bokeh you see of the leaves in the background is photo bokeh and not PS bokeh.:bigeyes:
Cheers.
LEW
1. Good advice - don't rush in to buy. Read up all you can in CS on m4/3, 4/3 section.
2. Not true smaller sensor got no bokeh. See picture below taken with Lumix G-1 (old model).
The bokeh you see of the leaves in the background is photo bokeh and not PS bokeh.:bigeyes:
Cheers.
LEW
Mm that's not to say smaller sensor no bokeh. I use a 4/3 camera myself. However, it's clear that it's harder to acheive the same 'quality' of bokeh than a camera with a larger sensor, since the smaller sensor gives rise to a greater depth of field at the same f number.
Correct me if I am wrong, but my understanding of the "quality" or "how bokeh it gets" depends on the focal length of the lens, how wide is the aperture and the distance from the subject when the photo is taken. One must bear in mind that a 50mm lens on a m4/3 is actually 100mm (X2 crop factor). So in order to get the same bokeh effect of a 50mm lens at say f/2.8 on a full frame cam, one must compare this to a 25mm f/2.8 m4/3 cam.:think:
Cheers.
LEW
Read this review of the oly e-pl1 / panny gf-1 / samsung nx-100 / sony nex-5
http://bythom.com/compactmirrorless.htm
He rated Panny GF-1 as the winner..
http://bythom.com/compactmirrorless.htm
He rated Panny GF-1 as the winner..
i agreed tat don't rush in to buy.
u can get bokeh with a m4/3 system.
depends on ur len n how u use it.
a fast len like the panasonic 20 f/1.7 or the olympus 17 f/2.8 can get bokeh result with the aperature wide open.
the kit len is possible too, but depends on how u shoot it.
eg at the long end 42mm, if u focus near(like food shots etc), then u can get boken quite easily for the background.
bokeh depends on the lenses too, not jus the sensor.
pls correct me if my last statement is wrong
frankly, i like gf1 too.
but would get a olympus e-p2 jus for the fun factor as the art filters can really make ur shots more creative n fun to look at
speakin of which, i'm waitin for my wallet to recover before gettin a m4/3 before my holiday trip
u can get bokeh with a m4/3 system.
depends on ur len n how u use it.
a fast len like the panasonic 20 f/1.7 or the olympus 17 f/2.8 can get bokeh result with the aperature wide open.
the kit len is possible too, but depends on how u shoot it.
eg at the long end 42mm, if u focus near(like food shots etc), then u can get boken quite easily for the background.
bokeh depends on the lenses too, not jus the sensor.
pls correct me if my last statement is wrong
frankly, i like gf1 too.
but would get a olympus e-p2 jus for the fun factor as the art filters can really make ur shots more creative n fun to look at
speakin of which, i'm waitin for my wallet to recover before gettin a m4/3 before my holiday trip
Last edited:
No, that's the AMOUNT of background blur. Bokeh, or the QUALITY of the blur, will depend on the lens and is a characteristic of the lens.
Bad advice. You may change camera body, but I don't think it's actually wise to change system every 2 years.
True, you can get shallow DOF with 43 cameras. In fact, you can get shallow DOF with probably any compact camera in the market nowadays. But is the acheivable bokeh enough? That's the main point to consider.
i'm giving EVIL advise.. buy buy buy.. I have 3 bodies and 2 systems in 18 months.
My friend change 3 systems 4 bodies in 1 yr..
:devil:
Just buy a used system from B&S section and try out, when you change system the damage is minimum.:devil::devil::devil:
My friend change 3 systems 4 bodies in 1 yr..
:devil:
Just buy a used system from B&S section and try out, when you change system the damage is minimum.:devil::devil::devil:
Agree. Just go and buy whichever body you like. Most of the m4/3 bodies are good. They just have different features. Study the features, get a feel of the different bodies at the shop and get started soon. You can also read the reviews of the different cameras at dpreview.
Bokeh and the "QUALITY" of bokeh is a very widely discussed topic. The Carl Zeiss factory has an article dedicated to this subject and it states that bokeh is dependent not on lens alone but on many other parameters, I quote some of the pertinent points below:
Quote:
All the parameters listed here influence the phenomena outside the focal plane:
Picture format
Focal length
f-number
The camera-to-subject distance
Distance to the background or the foreground
Shapes and patterns of the subject
Aperture iris shape
Aberrations of the lens
Speed of the lens
Foreground/background brightness
Colour
Unquote.
Quote:
It is therefore not surprising that one often hears different and sometimes contradictory judgements about the bokeh of many lenses. Undue generalisations are all too often drawn from single observations.
Many effects are attributed to the lens even though they are mainly caused by the subject in front of the camera. Differences between lenses are often very marginal but are then grossly exaggerated.
This leads to the following rules about bokeh:
Some caution is advised when making judgments about the bokeh depending on the lens correction, because bokeh is extremely variable.
The correction balancing has an especially strong influence on the blurriness of the rendition at small deviations from the focal point. If there is a lot of blurriness, it usually becomes more and more negligible.
The aperture has a strong influence; even closing the aperture a small amount can cause very visible changes to the nature of the blurriness. Slower prime lenses generally have smaller spherical aberration by nature. So it is no wonder that their bokeh is praised for its appeal.
The spherical aberration of a lens also changes depending on the imaging scale. Bokeh characteristics therefore depend on the focusing distance as well.
Unquote.
For those who have time to read the rather long article, the link is below:
[http://www.zeiss.com/C12567A8003B8B6F/EmbedTitelIntern/CLN_35_Bokeh_EN/$File/CLN35_Bokeh_en.pdf
Cheers.
LEW
I've read a number of published articles on bokeh and none has mentioned that the sensor has anything to do with it. See one of the authoritative articles on bokeh that I've quoted above.
Cheers.
LEW
Similar threads
