GAS GAS: Please Share your Latest Desires Big and Small

[MoonMind]

Matt, all jokes aside, the Olympus E-M10 MkII with the 14-42 EZ produces excellent images (Sony 16 MPx sensor), has decent/excellent IBIS and is tiny. BUT it is not weather/dust sealed. Could be your answer?

To get decent high ISO (6400) images out of any mFTs camera, you must get your exposure exactly right in the camera, and know your light. I know that you are competent at the light part.

Here is a shot of Rosa taken with my E-M1 MkI (relatively crappy and noisy Panasonic 16 MPx sensor) taken with my 12-50 macro 'kit' lens.

View attachment 304119

Focus is on her irises.
It is by no means a one off.

The combo is nice enough; I prefer the Panasonic 12-32mm myself if we're talking about tiny zooms.

But it misses out on one major criterium I mentioned: weather-sealing! If any of those compact lenses existed with sealing, I'd be all over it.

All this aside, I'm actually seriously considering to forgo pocketability once more (or once and for all); a viable solution might be to stick with the E-M5 III and the 12-45mm f/4 PRO - and add the equally well sealed 20mm f/1.4 PRO, a lens I had previously written off as "over the top" but now view in the light of complementing a very compact, very well made bad-weather kit. I'll decide this weekend ... *Not* buying the X100V will let me get the 20mm *and* keep the Panasonic 25mm f/1.4 II that I love for its rendering (it's very, very close to my Leica Summicron-M 50mm f/2 in character) - a lens that, while sealed, I don't trust as far as the Olympus ones. It's a somewhat decadent course of action, but it feels kind of right - and it saves me all the trouble of putting together a "complete" X100V setup. I may even keep the G1X III around ... it's not as if I can expect to get a lot of money for it if I try to sell it.

I'll not argue about what's "usable" and what's not when it comes to high ISO. YMMV, depending on personal thresholds and preferences. My personal limit is ISO 1600 for current 20MP sensors - which is perfectly okay by me. Between fantastic I.B.I.S. and really nice fast glass, I don't need more (I've used ISO 3200 in a pinch). I don't like to sacrifice colour depth, dynamic range and clarity if I don't have to, and I try to use as little noise reduction as I can get away with. Thus, I'll go no higher than ISO 6400 even on my Nikon FX bodies. But I fully recognise that's just me ...

M.

 

[mnhoj]

@MoonMind Have you tried DXO prime Matt?
I trialed it for a few weeks while I was still shooting with a G9. The added conversion step isn't too much fun but the results were pretty good.

 

[MoonMind]

@MoonMind Have you tried DXO prime Matt?
I trialed it for a few weeks while I was still shooting with a G9. The added conversion step isn't too much fun but the results were pretty good.

No, I haven't, and I won't. Please, don't take this as rudeness on my part: I'm basically a Free Software guy (Free Software, not freeware). The one piece of editing software I've bought (crowdfunded, back in the day - so I only had to pay once, and a small sum) is Polarr which I like a lot and use extensively because in spite of its simplicity, it usually produces results I'm satisfied with; furthermore, it also works on my smartphone and all tablets.

For more serious editing, I use darktable, sometimes RawTherapee and very rarely GIMP; my catalogue is maintained with XnView which I also use for printing. The only other pieces of proprietary software for photography are VueScan (I'm paid up with them as well) and Adobe's DNG Converter. Except for the latter, everything runs on all systems I maintain, crucially including my GNU/Linux installs. As soon as worklife ends, I'll ditch Windows across the board, so it's important for me to have a solution that keeps on working. Since the M8 is the only camera whose files I regularily use DNG Converter for, I think I'll be fine in the long run.

Honestly, I'm completely satisfied with my way of approaching things. I don't need to coax things out of my images, nor do I feel the need to use higher ISOs. I just don't care. I can get results I like with my workflow and choices, and if I can't, that's okay as well. I don't feel I'm missing anything.

All this said, in the light of the current situation, I may at some point invest in a piece of software from Luminar (probably Neo) - but frankly, I don't care enough about computational photography do take the jump just yet, even under these circumstances.

M.

 

[John King]

@MoonMind I understand where you're at, Matt.

While I use Polarr, Snapseed and a few other things on my tablets, I'm basically a Photoshop person since around 2005. At 74 y.o. (bloody nearly 75 ), I simply cannot be bothered learning some other s/w. I don't even like Lightroom ... I also paid for FastStone Viewer.

I find Bridge and Photoshop intuitive. I cannot say that about any other software, specially not tablet s/w - there is always something essential that's either missing, or so well hidden that it may as well be!

 

[RichardC]

No, I haven't, and I won't. Please, don't take this as rudeness on my part: I'm basically a Free Software guy (Free Software, not freeware). The one piece of editing software I've bought (crowdfunded, back in the day - so I only had to pay once, and a small sum) is Polarr which I like a lot and use extensively because in spite of its simplicity, it usually produces results I'm satisfied with; furthermore, it also works on my smartphone and all tablets.

For more serious editing, I use darktable, sometimes RawTherapee and very rarely GIMP; my catalogue is maintained with XnView which I also use for printing. The only other pieces of proprietary software for photography are VueScan (I'm paid up with them as well) and Adobe's DNG Converter. Except for the latter, everything runs on all systems I maintain, crucially including my GNU/Linux installs. As soon as worklife ends, I'll ditch Windows across the board, so it's important for me to have a solution that keeps on working. Since the M8 is the only camera whose files I regularily use DNG Converter for, I think I'll be fine in the long run.

Honestly, I'm completely satisfied with my way of approaching things. I don't need to coax things out of my images, nor do I feel the need to use higher ISOs. I just don't care. I can get results I like with my workflow and choices, and if I can't, that's okay as well. I don't feel I'm missing anything.

All this said, in the light of the current situation, I may at some point invest in a piece of software from Luminar (probably Neo) - but frankly, I don't care enough about computational photography do take the jump just yet, even under these circumstances.

M.

Hi Matt.

DxO PureRaw is a one month free trial so you could try it for 30 days and maintain your free software ethos. Drag and drop.

DxO software has cured most of my GAS.

 

[MoonMind]

Hi Matt.

DxO PureRaw is a one month free trial so you could try it for 30 days and maintain your free software ethos. Drag and drop.

DxO software has cured most of my GAS.

Free software is not about "gratis". It's about proprietary code vs. open source code (and a few other things, but let's not get into that). I'm not - i.e. no longer - a zealot regarding this, but I'm still as picky as I can bring myself to be. And I've *never* actually had software GAS. Nor will I develop any. I appreciate the recommendations regarding DXO, though - should I ever think that software limited my options, I'll look into it.

On the notion of GAS: One of the watched X100Vs has crossed my limit already, so it's one down. And after thinking some more about it, I'll probably not buy anything right now if the auctions "fall through". As some (myself included, to be honest) have pointed out, the camera I'm looking for doesn't actually exist, and while the 20mm f/1.4 PRO does indeed look very enticing, I'm pretty certain I'd not pick it over the "lowly" Nikon Z 40mm f/2 on the Z 6 on a regular basis. The last thing I need is something basically redundant on arrival. However, the more I see from the 20mm f/1.4 PRO, the more I think it's a killer lens. So, there's an option if things don't move in the direction I'd like. I can - and really should! - relax for now.

That said, Voigtländer just announced the 23mm f/1.2 D for Z mount - I'll get that lens next (that's not actually news, I've talked about it before), and probably also the new super-small Heliar 40mm f/2.8 for my Ms, come May. This'll be fun. Who knows - perhaps the 40mm f/2.8 will end up turning one of the Ms into a "pocketable powerhouse"? Only joking ... they're not sealed the way I'd want, and they're somewhat bigger than I'd like for that purpose. But shooting them is so rewarding - better than any fiddly technical "masterpiece", at least whenever there's enough time to actually enjoy the process.

M.

 

[RichardC]

The 20mm f1.4 PRO looks like a fine lens. I've toyed with the idea of selling the 17mm/25mm f1.2s and buying that one. Trouble is, I know that at some point in the future I'm going to want both of them back! I got the 25mm because it was "free" with an EM1 Mk2 - intending to sell it, but then didn't.

Then there's drawback with selling to justify a newer purchase. I sold an 8mm f1.8 and 75mm f1.8 a couple of years ago as part of an equipment reshuffle because "I didn't use them enough" and bought the excellent 12-100. Then looking back, it seems when I did use the primes, I made very good use of them - They're on my RADAR lol.

 

[John King]

The 20mm f1.4 PRO looks like a fine lens. I've toyed with the idea of selling the 17mm/25mm f1.2s and buying that one. Trouble is, I know that at some point in the future I'm going to want both of them back! I got the 25mm because it was "free" with an EM1 Mk2 - intending to sell it, but then didn't.

Then there's drawback with selling to justify a newer purchase. I sold an 8mm f1.8 and 75mm f1.8 a couple of years ago as part of an equipment reshuffle because "I didn't use them enough" and bought the excellent 12-100. Then looking back, it seems when I did use the primes, I made very good use of them - They're on my RADAR lol.

That's why I never sell anything, Richard ... .

 

[Bobby T]

All this aside, I'm actually seriously considering to forgo pocketability once more (or once and for all);

M.

Some time ago I gave up on the search for a good pocketable camera. And decided that my phone camera would work for that need. Although the phone I currently have is a 2 or 3 models old. It is new enough to be one of the models with three lenses onboard and good weather resistance.

 

[MoonMind]

Some time ago I gave up on the search for a good pocketable camera. And decided that my phone camera would work for that need. Although the phone I currently have is a 2 or 3 models old. It is new enough to be one of the models with three lenses onboard and good weather resistance.

My experience with shooting in the rain is that it's really important to be able to protect the lenses; even a small hood goes a long way. That's what's missing entirely from smartphones, and the way you have to handle them to get well composed images (two-handed) makes shielding the lenses quite tricky.

That said, I'm really trying to wrap my head around shooting with my (already aging, but still very convincing) OnePlus 8 Pro. The good news is that all three cameras perform adequately (as long as you don't use the zoom function), with the main camera (predictably) leading the pack, but the "tele" (50mm-e 75mm-e) and super-wide also delivering usable results - if there's enough light; low light and night shots are a mess, at least when not using night mode which turns them into - a computational mess. I don't know how these results compare to those from other smartphones, but they're hard to stomach, even coming from older, small-ish sensors like which, frankly, are miles ahead. I also still don't enjoy the process much, but have come to appreciate the convenience. In fairness, the 8 Pro certainly delivers better images than any of my former small compacts (and certainly the Canon IXUS 132 I still have lying around - sometimes, shooting with a trashy camera can be fun). I'd say they get close to what my Nikon 1 V1 is capable of, even at ISO 800 - but shooting with that camera is infinitely more fun, and the Nikon 1 lenses are loads better than the built-in stuff; more flexible, too, with aperture being available. So, in the end, I still get much more satisfying results with the V1. But I have to say that I start feeling a bit safer just using the 8 Pro - it's definitely no slouch for what it is. I may post some images taken with it in the next few days to see what you guys think ...

btw. Found an extensive review by Fred Miranda on the Voigtländer Heliar 40mm f/2.8 VM Aspherical ... lovely little shooter, apparently, and really quite good. Trouble is, I already own the at least equally solid Ultron 35mm f/2 that's only a tiny bit bigger. I'd better make sure I'm not settled on that front as well.

In the meantime, I've done all my chores for today (office stuff can wait till tomorrow) - time to head outside! Shooting is so much more rewarding than ruminating ...

M.

 

[mike3996]

At 750€. Yes, yes you do.

Now the seller has lowered it to 700 €.

Must remain strong

 

[mpeterson]

Now the seller has lowered it to 700 €.

Must remain strong

As Canadian comedian Red Green would say, “Keep your stick on the ice, we’re all in this together”.

 

[davidzvi]

Sadly, the x100v is not the answer. At least not for me. I had issues with its viewfinder (with eyeglasses), price, AF speed and the lens field of view. Also not pocket-able even with the smallest WR kit. I also foolishly had a silver one.

It wasn't for me either, though I will disagree, it's easily jacket pocket-able. And I had the Haoge LH-X51B Ultra-Thin Hood and Megagear 1/2 case.

I agree speed was only OK, better than my X70 (or I suspect the XF10); about the same as my Pen F, but slower than my E-P7. I also find the E-P7 hunts less in lower light even though the X100v has phase AF and the E-P7 doesn't. The E-P7 would be a nice option if it were sealed and had a popup EVF but......

No idea why Sony hasn't released a seal RX100 yet.

I would love a little fixed lens, sealed, large sensor, with EVF option. Give me a body the size of the E-P7 or Fuji X30. And I'd love the manual zoom lens like the Fuji X30 with the on/off tied to the lens extending. Olympus / OM has more than a few lenses that extend to be "ready" so why not? I'd even be more than happy with a limited 20-40mme (or similar) zoom range and Panasonic multi aspect setup that never uses the whole senor to save some size.

 

[MoonMind]

It wasn't for me either, though I will disagree, it's easily jacket pocket-able. And I had the Haoge LH-X51B Ultra-Thin Hood and Megagear 1/2 case.

I agree speed was only OK, better than my X70 (or I suspect the XF10); about the same as my Pen F, but slower than my E-P7. I also find the E-P7 hunts less in lower light even though the X100v has phase AF and the E-P7 doesn't. The E-P7 would be a nice option if it were sealed and had a popup EVF but......

No idea why Sony hasn't released a seal RX100 yet.

I would love a little fixed lens, sealed, large sensor, with EVF option. Give me a body the size of the E-P7 or Fuji X30. And I'd love the manual zoom lens like the Fuji X30 with the on/off tied to the lens extending. Olympus / OM has more than a few lenses that extend to be "ready" so why not? I'd even be more than happy with a limited 20-40mme (or similar) zoom range and Panasonic multi aspect setup that never uses the whole senor to save some size.

I'm "cured" for the moment anyway - no X100V for me right now because however good it may be in certain respects, from my perspective, it's half-baked. And no Olympus 20mm f/1.4 PRO either, at least short-term, in spite of the fact that it's a fantastic lens - I'm too happy with the Z 40mm f/2 to seek an alternative, and I also love the 12-45mm f/4 PRO as a go-to lens on the E-M5 III. Why complicate things?

A sealed LX100 variant with a decent lens (I'd love the proposed specs - 20-40mm-e f/2.8, to be more precise) would have my name on it. Great idea. I also like the idea of an E-P7 sized sealed body (and would definitely love to see an EVF, pop-up or not - I'd take that over a PEN-F II), but they'd also have to add a collapsible sealed zoom (or small sealed prime). But realistically, neither will happen.

Nikon has some interesting primes (and zooms) planned, specifically for DX. Maybe something emerges on that front ...

M.

 

[The Electric Squirrel]

Now the seller has lowered it to 700 €.

Must remain strong

You can do it! It's not that hard, just keep your wallet in your pants, mate...

I've had a similar hard time keeping me wallet in me pants after spotting a moderately priced Bronica SQ-A on a Finnish speaking forum. If I wasn't just going to head out to collect a lightly used Mondeo, I'd have an even harder time not pouncing. Luckily my spouse reminded me about not having the darkroom to support a film camera when I spoke with her about the matter.

 

[davidzvi]

......A sealed LX100 variant with a decent lens (I'd love the proposed specs - 20-40mm-e f/2.8, to be more precise) would have my name on it. Great idea. I also like the idea of an E-P7 sized sealed body (and would definitely love to see an EVF, pop-up or not - I'd take that over a PEN-F II), but they'd also have to add a collapsible sealed zoom (or small sealed prime). But realistically, neither will happen.....

Sealed with a limited range zoom really shouldn't be too hard or too unreasonable a want. All of these are about the sames size. But only one is sealed and sadly it's the only one that has no IS (IBIS or OIS). And the one I've enjoyed the most isn't sealed and is the only one without an EVF. They are all tradeoffs.

I could probably be OK with a fixed lens option, but that limited zoom range option would be my first ever pre-order for a camera. The range was more than enough when we went to Portland and Seattle some years back.

2017 - Vacation - Seattle and Portland - My Random Eye

My personal photographic interested.

www.myrandomeye.com

 

[mike3996]

They are all tradeoffs.

The Fuji is well stabilized thanks to its leaf shutter, and with a wide 35mm eqv how many stops would one stand to gain from stabilization. I understand why it's not a hugest necessity to put it in a camera of this sort, even if Ricoh did it. (They have a different body design anyway, different needs.)

The X100v is also the only one in this group that has PDAF focus. Useful or not, in night time shooting I still find every CDAF system produce false positives at an alarming rate. PDAF would probably provide the best success rate and probably also the fastest S-AF focusing in such dark conditions I regularly shoot. It's also the only camera with a guaranteed fluent view in any light thanks to its OVF. For night time (under city lights) shooting the X100v is unbeatable even if in IQ front you can get a faster lens in front of a better stabilized M4/3 body.

Are my requirements useful to anyone, I don't know. But I thought I'd bring my view.

 

[JensM]

Whilst trotting back and forth to the mailbox, eagerly awaiting the Lumix G6 with its companion 14-140 f:3.5-5,6 which is late due to the Easter hollidays here, I have developed an urge towards the DMC-GWC1 Wide Conversion Lens which fits the 14mm F:2.5 and the 14-42PZ.

It drops the 14 mm end down to 11ish mm, as well as adding about half to a stop of light gathering. I have stated earlier that "just carry the 12-32" in a pocket for the wide end, this is probably the sensible thing to do, but I am still intrigued, weight wise they come out about the same, but the GWC1 leaves out the opening of the camera to swap lenses.

Also having browsed through my LR catalouge, I am somewhat intrigued by the Lumix 14-42 MkII, a lens I have had but just used untill I got my grubby mitts on the first 12-32. The MkII are dirt cheap second hand, so I may get one, if I stumble over one.

There is also the G90 that showed up in the classifieds this day, body only at €450 , so it is cheap (for the model) and would take care of the urge for a "smallish" weather restistant housing. I do struggle with seeing that happening, as I have enough bodies to use one or more as a "sacrifical body" along with a ditto small lens, the GF5 or the GX800 and one of the 12-32s brood springs to mind or perhaps the most beat up of the LX7s. They are sadly lacking in the LVF dept, though, which is why I got the G3. All of these combos combined with a 12-32 would leave me less than €200 out of pocket, if it fails, depending a bit on how it counts. If I consider that I paid €100 for the GX800 along with a 12-32, and use that lens, all of these combos are sub €100, but would have a somewhat higher replacement value.

So I see your conundrum @MoonMind ,even though I am addressing that problem a bit different. The trouble with my solution is that I keep spending on cheap bodies to chase the dragon and when I get a new clunker, I take a liking to it and then it end up being somewhat nursed, due to them not making them anymore... .

That said, I do clean up the results in Topaz, if they are grubby.

 

[RichardC]

I'm "cured" for the moment anyway..............

M.

Treating a few timely symptoms doesn't necessarily fix the underlying disease.

 

[davidzvi]

The Fuji is well stabilized thanks to its leaf shutter, and with a wide 35mm eqv how many stops would one stand to gain from stabilization. I understand why it's not a hugest necessity to put it in a camera of this sort, even if Ricoh did it. (They have a different body design anyway, different needs.)

The X100v is also the only one in this group that has PDAF focus. Useful or not, in night time shooting I still find every CDAF system produce false positives at an alarming rate. PDAF would probably provide the best success rate and probably also the fastest S-AF focusing in such dark conditions I regularly shoot. It's also the only camera with a guaranteed fluent view in any light thanks to its OVF. For night time (under city lights) shooting the X100v is unbeatable even if in IQ front you can get a faster lens in front of a better stabilized M4/3 body.

Are my requirements useful to anyone, I don't know. But I thought I'd bring my view.

Sorry but I take advantage of IBIS all the time, whether for shooting angle, shutter speed, or both.

I thought the PDAF of the X100v would give it the AF advantage, and in AF-C or moving subjects it probably does. But I did a couple basic side by side shots (I wouldn't in any way call them scientific tests) and found the E-P7 was actually a little quicker. In a couple situations the X100v notably hunted before lock where the E-P7 would lock on quicker. (I was testing using the Pan 14mm f/2.5 II)

I could very well have had some settings messed up that contributed to what I was seeing. But yes as this would be a premium compact I'd want the PDAF version of the 20mp sensor over the CDAF.


Edit: But none of this means either is a better or worse camera. It's just better for my use case as the X100v is better for yours. I really did enjoy shooting the X100v and I'm glad I gave it a work out.