Personal gear review

[agentlossing]

I do love infinity shots with large aperture settings like these. Making distant objects seem 3D and jump out of the picture is something few lenses can really do.

 

[rayvonn]

I do love infinity shots with large aperture settings like these. Making distant objects seem 3D and jump out of the picture is something few lenses can really do.

It’s the manual focus lenses that seem to render those results and for me the Nokton 58mm achieves that the best. They’ll be other lenses that achieve the same of course. But the lens has got to be good. I suppose shooting like that could be a good way of testing a lens. Seeing how those F0.95 lenses cope would be interesting, but no one seems to do that.

 

[mike3996]

Being cheap hinders one to realize the most potential in one's system.

I suffer from this a lot, and I think many others do too.

So what happens when you're being cheap?

You are interested in a camera because it might suit your style, it might have the ergonomics, whatnot. So you buy one maybe preowned so that your possible resale loss will be minimal. No harm here.

You get a couple of lenses that you like and you go on exploring what the new system brings you.

Some time passes and you form your first impressions, second impressions, start to make some early conclusions. Maybe at this point in time you find that the camera and the system wasn't exactly what you hoped for, maybe it wasn't a hit for you.

No problem, that's why we acquired the gear second-hand. You take a very small hit, financially speaking, when you sell it all.

But did you explore the system to its full capability?

That's where the cheapness starts to cause trouble. The first phase of the honey moon is over, you're not feeling it, you think it's more than probable that you sell it. When your mind is set towards this outcome, the cheap you won't explore the unexplored. You stick with the lenses you bought during the honeymoon, you won't explore the lens catalogue any further, because "you'd only sell them at a small loss later on" and the hassle relating to selling them.

So this is how I have had it, for a couple of times now.

With Fujifilm X-T3 I had 5 lenses for it, all acquired as a bundle so it was convenient to be sure. But I didn't have the feeling for the camera, it's a great camera but something just nagged me about it. The lenses were a small part of the issue. Among the five two were nice (18/2 and 27/2.8) for my optical preferences but two were a bit bland and soulless (35/2, 50/2) and one was a zoom.

I knew from my earlier foray that 35/1.4 is a nice lens, I also had some intrigue towards the 60/2.4 and maybe 90/2 and the 50-230 as well. But I never got around to them because I was already pretty convinced that they'd not solve the problems. But what if I'd totally had clicked with them, the story might have been different?

A similar thing with my Nikon Df right now. I have three lenses for it currently, having tried six lenses in total. But my frustrations are more towards the camera than the lenses in this case. I have some basic frustrations with Nikon because it's not a Leica M and I am thinking if it could get closer to a Leica if I have it serviced and fitted with a focusing screen.

But now my cheapness is screaming to me, the fees are 0% recoverable when reselling so do I want to even go this route? This makes me think about the focusing screen very carefully, too carefully in fact. Perhaps this would completely redo the way I shoot with the camera. But of course, focus is not the only beef I have with the Df and a focusing screen won't touch the other aspects I find irritating.

We may never know!

 

[tonyturley]

This month’s Small Sensor Symposium has got me thinking. Some of you do great work with 1” sensor cameras, and even smaller sensors. I like my X30 a lot; it only begins to fall behind in low light, and even then I’ve been able to get some very pleasing images in the dark. I like to sometimes photograph the critters around my yard, and in the summer chasing butterflies is a pleasant diversion. But I’ve never been keen on the larger APS-C lenses, at least not for long. Even MFT lenses with any sort of reach are longer than I prefer. I like the idea of a superzoom, but most of their bodies are a lot bigger than I like, and I don’t care for PZ lenses.

After much reading and reviewing, I came to a decision. I sold my X-T2, XC 50-230, and XF 18. I bought a Nikon 1 V2, an 11-27.5, and found a new-in-box 30-110 for a good price. I had a 1 V1, but some of its quirks annoyed me. I think the size of the 1 V2 and lenses will be right in my comfort zone. While the 70-300 VR has a reputation as a quality lens, its size compared to the camera puts me off. So I’ll be solely playing in the small sensor waters for the time being. We’ll see how it goes. If I like the 1 V2 well enough, I might buy a second one and stuff it on the shelf as insurance.

 

[CraigC]

The Nikon1 definitely has its benefits, and is capable of very nice results.

The compact 10mm pancake would be a nice replacement for your XF18.

Enjoy the new gear Tony.

 

[tonyturley]

Just for grins, I modeled my former X-T2 + XF 18mm. the 1 V2 + 11-27.5mm, and X30. Even with the lens, the 1 V2 is only slightly deeper and weighs slightly less than my X30. For some time now, I've been leaving the X-T2 at home and carrying only the X30 on bike rides. If the 2/3" sensor X30 can produce pleasing images, then I'm betting the 1" sensor 1 V2 will do at least as well. I might have to start posting in the "Dead Camera Walking" thread.

Compact Camera Meter

Compare unlimited number of cameras with lenses, see how compact or bulky a camera is and sort by height, width, depth and weight.

camerasize.com

 

[drd1135]

Just for grins, I modeled my former X-T2 + XF 18mm. the 1 V2 + 11-27.5mm, and X30. Even with the lens, the 1 V2 is only slightly deeper and weighs slightly less than my X30. For some time now, I've been leaving the X-T2 at home and carrying only the X30 on bike rides. If the 2/3" sensor X30 can produce pleasing images, then I'm betting the 1" sensor 1 V2 will do at least as well. I might have to start posting in the "Dead Camera Walking" thread.

Compact Camera Meter

Compare unlimited number of cameras with lenses, see how compact or bulky a camera is and sort by height, width, depth and weight.

camerasize.com

My friend has the V2. I always liked the way it felt in my hand. The grip is plenty big for the weight. With the 18 (50 mme-ish) it’s a very small package.

 

[tonyturley]

My friend has the V2. I always liked the way it felt in my hand. The grip is plenty big for the weight. With the 18 (50 mme-ish) it’s a very small package.

Mine arrived today. I'm amazed how small it looks and feels in person. It almost makes the X30 look large. My 11-27.5mm lens arrives tomorrow.

 

[Bobby Tingle]

I'm amazed how small it looks and feels in person.

That's what she said

 

[JensM]

Very interesting tread this, comes along with some GAS, a bit of curiosity and a bit of hunting as such.

For me, it is somewhat about size. I somewhat kept shooting film with the Canon EOS620, supplemented with a digitial PS untill 2004 or 5. Somewhat is quite describing, I didnt shoot much film mainly some rolls when going places I though would be worthy dragging the bag around, primarily on vacations and/or trips but seldom left the house without the little 3MP Konica in a belt pouch on any given day.

In 06 I didnt bother schlepping the SLR around, but felt a bit constrained with the Konica, so I sprung for a Canon Powershot. Bad research left me with the S3, instead of the G7, after giving the sales clerk the precise order of "I would like the latest model powershot, please" and the G7 was released the week over, so reading reviews and not remembering the name of the model was a bit naff, it also didnt end particulary well, the camera may very well still be hanging on the birch branch I put it on while having lunch up in the mountains.

Then I bought an Ixus, and yet another Ixus for going off to foreign shores for a couple of tours. Had my eyes set on the the Powershot G10, but my colleague and me managed to rile us up into some sort of GAS/camera frenzy on some silent nights and I ended up with the then fresh Pentax K7, it had all I was keen on in a system, relatively small house at about 850 grams, IBIS and weather sealing along with the accompanying two weather sealed lenses 18-55, 50-200 kit zooms and the large Pentax flash. When push came to show, it was a bag kit and hence not much used- mainly trips and vacations. For the most parts, I just stuck that little, and worn Ixus into my pocket and called it a day, warts and all, but eyeing up the Fujis hard, but was leery toward it due to cost/benefit. In some dark corner of my brain I was somewhat keen to get going on photography again, but on the other hand, I wasnt to keen to spend on something which may or may not happen as such (getting back into it).

A friend of mine, which I share other hobbies with and a keen and gifted photographer in his own right was into M43 and keep harping on about it, he had also restarted with a Pentax, but got onboard with the K5.

I did snigger at him quite a bit, but started looking into it. I must admit having read "Sensor is sized about the same as the old 110 film" and having had a sorry excuse of a camera in that format way back then, I wasnt overly keen. Then Olympus released the Pen-F, in silver it was probably the most beautiful camera I had seen in more than two decades, so finger oogling it whilst oohing and aaahing, and drooling left me off for a cooling off periode and I then bought a GX7 in black and after some months and a couple of thousand pictures with the GX7, I got a GX8, also in black, with the GX7 taking second chair. I have rather large hands and the GX7 was a smidge on the tiny size for my frying pans. When I got the GX8, I also looked at the GM5, but it was just to tiny. I can somewhat fit the GX7 with the 35-100 on, the 12-32 and the Meike 35 in the palm of my hand.

After a year and a half with both cameras, I sold off the GX7 when it still held some value and ran the GX8 alone for a period, awaiting the release of the GX9, it came and was not was I anticipated so I keept going with the GX8, but added bits on the lens side, keeping to the "classics" in the system, the Lumix 12-35 and Oly 40-150 pro F:2.8s as well as the PL8-18 plus some primes and the lumix kit kombo of 12-32 and 35-100.

I bought the Oly 40-150 10 days or so, before the firm confirmation of the release of the PL50-200, after having gotten in a paralysis by analysis between the Oly and the Lumix 35-100 f:2.8 and holding that for a couple of years. The oly is very nice and rightly deserves its classic spot, but for me, it was just to big to bother with. Took it to Kenya on safari and it worked there but carrying it on the off-chance of it seeing use wasnt something I did.

Bought the G9 in 2019, never looked back. Sold the Oly and the Panasonic 100-300MkI to finance the PL50-200, managed it without loss by buying them second hand and ditto with the PL50-200, have also bought a second hand PL12-60, so managed to wrangle myself into a rather large small sensor system, the battery grip for the G9 is not helping either but thats for special occasions and the 2hand cost of it was about 30$ more than just an OEM battery, which came with grip so it wasnt a big deal to jump aboard. Got a bit of gas this January and found some stellar deals on 2hand stuff, the GX9 in a bundle wich leaves me something about $150 out of pocket for the house, when the rest is flipped, a GX1 with the 14-42PZ, which is in the black when the lens is flipped.

The GX9 came with the OEM handgrip, and after horsing around with it a bit, I think the GX8 will find its way out of my ownership, along with an assortment of accumulated lenses, and an Olympus TG6 allocating the take of the sales towards other camera gear, I am somewhat keen on the PL25 MkII and possibly one of 42.5s as well as a 1.4X TC for the 50-200.

If and when there may be another safari, I will probably get the PL100-400, I really cant see it my line-up before that, and depending on circumstances, the TC may do the trick, I felt the lack of reach on some occasions with the Oly 40-150 with 1.4TC.

So that leaves me with the following line-up

Bodies:
GX1, clunker camera no worries, would like a LVF-2 to round it off. The one I bought have the dreaded screen delamination going on, so may pick up another one without it, its doesnt really matter as the cost is about 4 big mac deals.

GX9, possibles camera. The add-on grip and large eyecup really transforms it and makes the use of heavier lenses possible, strip of those accessories, slip on a pancake and it fits in a jacket pocket , good nr 2 house when the G9 does the heavy (lens) lifting.

G9, all around workhorse, cant really fault it, the house with the PL line-up from 8-200mm weighs in at less than 2 kilos, and fits in a reasonable small bag.

Lenses: PL 8-200, solid weatherproofed all-round performers, all I can ask for in reasonable sized packages.
Lumix 12-35MkII weatherproof, tiny for what it is, equally at home on the GX9 either with or without accessories and as well on the G9 for premium performance while carrying less than 1 kilo. May stand in for the PL12-60 if telephoto is the primary task for any outing.
PL15mm and 20mm MkII tiny primes.
Lumix 12-32 and 35-100 kit, tiny zooms, OIS for the GX1, tiny travel set for the GX9.
Oly 60 Macro, specialty lens, for digitialising slides and photos from the family archives from the start of 20th century and upwards. Bugs, flowers and other tiny stuff if I should get the urge for such.

Yes, I think I have arrived, the system gives me what I want for the forseeable future, for general purpose photography and it has come of age, so to speak, the only thing I know that I am loosing out of on these houses are the Live view, and it could have been nice, but then again, I have managed to live without it for four decades, so I guess I will manage that for the foreseeable future.

If the M43 system pack it in, I would probably get another set of houses and leave it in the box until the house I have now packs it in, and I could see myself drifting into the Leica CL universe somewhere down the road for that, but then again that would probably be Leica CL3 or 4...

The only system I am properly curious about as of now, is the Fujifilm Medium format, but I cant really see that happening based on cost/benefit combined with wallet size.

I may have a look at the Ricoh GRIII, or look for something along those lines in the small belt pocket segment.

Tried the Oly TG6 last year but found that wanting. Just recharged the batteries for the Canon S95 from my late father and will give that another spin, wasn't to happy with that the last time around but found it in a drawer so why not give it another chance?

I blame you lot and that Burling fellow on youtube for that, and mostly David Thorpe for the M43...

Cheers, if you have made it so far.

 

[MiguelATF]

Very interesting tread this, comes along with some GAS, a bit of curiosity and a bit of hunting as such.

For me, it is somewhat about size. I somewhat kept shooting film with the Canon EOS620, supplemented with a digitial PS untill 2004 or 5. Somewhat is quite describing, I didnt shoot much film mainly some rolls when going places I though would be worthy dragging the bag around, primarily on vacations and/or trips but seldom left the house without the little 3MP Konica in a belt pouch on any given day.

In 06 I didnt bother schlepping the SLR around, but felt a bit constrained with the Konica, so I sprung for a Canon Powershot. Bad research left me with the S3, instead of the G7, after giving the sales clerk the precise order of "I would like the latest model powershot, please" and the G7 was released the week over, so reading reviews and not remembering the name of the model was a bit naff, it also didnt end particulary well, the camera may very well still be hanging on the birch branch I put it on while having lunch up in the mountains.

Then I bought an Ixus, and yet another Ixus for going off to foreign shores for a couple of tours. Had my eyes set on the the Powershot G10, but my colleague and me managed to rile us up into some sort of GAS/camera frenzy on some silent nights and I ended up with the then fresh Pentax K7, it had all I was keen on in a system, relatively small house at about 850 grams, IBIS and weather sealing along with the accompanying two weather sealed lenses 18-55, 50-200 kit zooms and the large Pentax flash. When push came to show, it was a bag kit and hence not much used- mainly trips and vacations. For the most parts, I just stuck that little, and worn Ixus into my pocket and called it a day, warts and all, but eyeing up the Fujis hard, but was leery toward it due to cost/benefit. In some dark corner of my brain I was somewhat keen to get going on photography again, but on the other hand, I wasnt to keen to spend on something which may or may not happen as such (getting back into it).

A friend of mine, which I share other hobbies with and a keen and gifted photographer in his own right was into M43 and keep harping on about it, he had also restarted with a Pentax, but got onboard with the K5.

I did snigger at him quite a bit, but started looking into it. I must admit having read "Sensor is sized about the same as the old 110 film" and having had a sorry excuse of a camera in that format way back then, I wasnt overly keen. Then Olympus released the Pen-F, in silver it was probably the most beautiful camera I had seen in more than two decades, so finger oogling it whilst oohing and aaahing, and drooling left me off for a cooling off periode and I then bought a GX7 in black and after some months and a couple of thousand pictures with the GX7, I got a GX8, also in black, with the GX7 taking second chair. I have rather large hands and the GX7 was a smidge on the tiny size for my frying pans. When I got the GX8, I also looked at the GM5, but it was just to tiny. I can somewhat fit the GX7 with the 35-100 on, the 12-32 and the Meike 35 in the palm of my hand.

After a year and a half with both cameras, I sold off the GX7 when it still held some value and ran the GX8 alone for a period, awaiting the release of the GX9, it came and was not was I anticipated so I keept going with the GX8, but added bits on the lens side, keeping to the "classics" in the system, the Lumix 12-35 and Oly 40-150 pro F:2.8s as well as the PL8-18 plus some primes and the lumix kit kombo of 12-32 and 35-100.

I bought the Oly 40-150 10 days or so, before the firm confirmation of the release of the PL50-200, after having gotten in a paralysis by analysis between the Oly and the Lumix 35-100 f:2.8 and holding that for a couple of years. The oly is very nice and rightly deserves its classic spot, but for me, it was just to big to bother with. Took it to Kenya on safari and it worked there but carrying it on the off-chance of it seeing use wasnt something I did.

Bought the G9 in 2019, never looked back. Sold the Oly and the Panasonic 100-300MkI to finance the PL50-200, managed it without loss by buying them second hand and ditto with the PL50-200, have also bought a second hand PL12-60, so managed to wrangle myself into a rather large small sensor system, the battery grip for the G9 is not helping either but thats for special occasions and the 2hand cost of it was about 30$ more than just an OEM battery, which came with grip so it wasnt a big deal to jump aboard. Got a bit of gas this January and found some stellar deals on 2hand stuff, the GX9 in a bundle wich leaves me something about $150 out of pocket for the house, when the rest is flipped, a GX1 with the 14-42PZ, which is in the black when the lens is flipped.

The GX9 came with the OEM handgrip, and after horsing around with it a bit, I think the GX8 will find its way out of my ownership, along with an assortment of accumulated lenses, and an Olympus TG6 allocating the take of the sales towards other camera gear, I am somewhat keen on the PL25 MkII and possibly one of 42.5s as well as a 1.4X TC for the 50-200.

If and when there may be another safari, I will probably get the PL100-400, I really cant see it my line-up before that, and depending on circumstances, the TC may do the trick, I felt the lack of reach on some occasions with the Oly 40-150 with 1.4TC.

So that leaves me with the following line-up

Bodies:
GX1, clunker camera no worries, would like a LVF-2 to round it off. The one I bought have the dreaded screen delamination going on, so may pick up another one without it, its doesnt really matter as the cost is about 4 big mac deals.

GX9, possibles camera. The add-on grip and large eyecup really transforms it and makes the use of heavier lenses possible, strip of those accessories, slip on a pancake and it fits in a jacket pocket , good nr 2 house when the G9 does the heavy (lens) lifting.

G9, all around workhorse, cant really fault it, the house with the PL line-up from 8-200mm weighs in at less than 2 kilos, and fits in a reasonable small bag.

Lenses: PL 8-200, solid weatherproofed all-round performers, all I can ask for in reasonable sized packages.
Lumix 12-35MkII weatherproof, tiny for what it is, equally at home on the GX9 either with or without accessories and as well on the G9 for premium performance while carrying less than 1 kilo. May stand in for the PL12-60 if telephoto is the primary task for any outing.
PL15mm and 20mm MkII tiny primes.
Lumix 12-32 and 35-100 kit, tiny zooms, OIS for the GX1, tiny travel set for the GX9.
Oly 60 Macro, specialty lens, for digitialising slides and photos from the family archives from the start of 20th century and upwards. Bugs, flowers and other tiny stuff if I should get the urge for such.

Yes, I think I have arrived, the system gives me what I want for the forseeable future, for general purpose photography and it has come of age, so to speak, the only thing I know that I am loosing out of on these houses are the Live view, and it could have been nice, but then again, I have managed to live without it for four decades, so I guess I will manage that for the foreseeable future.

If the M43 system pack it in, I would probably get another set of houses and leave it in the box until the house I have now packs it in, and I could see myself drifting into the Leica CL universe somewhere down the road for that, but then again that would probably be Leica CL3 or 4...

The only system I am properly curious about as of now, is the Fujifilm Medium format, but I cant really see that happening based on cost/benefit combined with wallet size.

I may have a look at the Ricoh GRIII, or look for something along those lines in the small belt pocket segment.

Tried the Oly TG6 last year but found that wanting. Just recharged the batteries for the Canon S95 from my late father and will give that another spin, wasn't to happy with that the last time around but found it in a drawer so why not give it another chance?

I blame you lot and that Burling fellow on youtube for that, and mostly David Thorpe for the M43...

Cheers, if you have made it so far.

Wow. I made it all the way through, Jens... and found your camera Odyssey enjoyable.

Only one or two comments. I still miss my GX7 (because of its thoughtful design and the way it just seemed to fit into my hands and somehow be 'the right size' for everything), and I also miss the GX8 which was my primary 'serious' camera for several years and for which I don't have enough superlatives. But my recently acquired GX9 - for which I also have the factory grip - is reminding me more and more of the 'feel' of my old GX7, which is a good thing. Saying that it is a 'better camera' than its predecessors would be inaccurate for me; it's a different one, for sure, and in some ways a much more photographically capable one - but the GX7 was no slouch. But the GX9 keeps 'growing on me', metaphorically... and photographically.

I'd love to play around with a G9 some day, but my own tendencies are for smaller (and more lightweight) cameras, so I'm determined not to (I'm guessing that if I did, I would probably want to buy one...and I don't want that! ).

Like you, I still have a GX1 (mine is converted to infrrared, by the way, which is a whole other conversation), but it's a seriously cool and usable tiny camera - and if you can find an LVF2 for it, it will double or triple the fun of using it. I was also tempted by - and briefly owned - a tiny Olympus TG6 - but like you, I found mine seriously 'wanting' as well.

But I have to concur with you on your choice of the Lumix 12-35 zoom - probably one of the best all around lenses I have ever owned, or ever will own. Period. (Which by the way is saying a lot, for me, since I've owned a few truly fine pieces of glass, now and again.) I have the original (not the v ii) version - and used it extensively with by old GX8 - and kept being surprised by how good it was. It mates nicely with the GX9 by the way, and the whole camera+lens combo is surprisingly svelte.

The only other lens I would recommend to you - which I bought a year ago and am only recently beginning to appreciate more - is the relatively rare and quite small Lumix zoom, the Vario X 45-175mm. It's significantly better than most of the other inexpensive Olympus and Panasonic zooms, and (I know this will sound sacreligious to many) its quality rivals that of the much more expensive 'Pro' lines. But the best part is: it's stupidly small. Which makes it (all the more) easier to bring along with one, on walks or trips or bike rides or hikes or excursions. They are much harder to find than the relatively ubiquitous 40-150's, but more than worth it, if one is so inclined.

 

[JensM]

Would that be the Power zoom, Miguel?

I have dabbed a bit with the 14-42 one of those and even though it it proper puny, it is something there I am not entirely fond of. I have horsed around some with the 45-150, it was one of the lenses that came with the GX9, and I decided to let that go as well, even though it could be handy, the 35-100 kit is just that little bit smaller, even though the extra reach could would probably be nice. I think I will list that quite late, I tend to list stuff consecutively, not in bulk anyhow, so it may stick around for a bit.

 

[MiguelATF]

Would that be the Power zoom, Miguel?

I have dabbed a bit with the 14-42 one of those and even though it it proper puny, it is something there I am not entirely fond of. I have horsed around some with the 45-150, it was one of the lenses that came with the GX9, and I decided to let that go as well, even though it could be handy, the 35-100 kit is just that little bit smaller, even though the extra reach could would probably be nice. I think I will list that quite late, I tend to list stuff consecutively, not in bulk anyhow, so it may stick around for a bit.

It does have a power zoom switch but I have never used it - since it also has both a manual zoom ring and a manual focusing ring. I've only used the manual ones. The other cool thing about the lens is, it has what Panasonic used to call O.I.S. - aka Optical Image Stabilization - which gives stabilization to images taken with the lens, even or especially if one is using it on a camera body without internal stabilization.

But theoretically, when using an O.I.S. equipped lens with a camera body that has built-in stabilization - as the GX8, GX9 and G9 all do - it supposedly doubles the effective amount of stabilization. Translation: images taken at lower hand-held speeds are much more likely to be in focus. Which is cool.

There are or were two types of OIS as far as I know. One was just plain O.I.S. - which incorporates the stabilization into the lens. These lenses have a switch which allows you to turn it on or off (not quite certain why one would want to turn it off). The other variation is called Power O.I.S. - and refers to lenses with built-in power zooms. Like the 45-175mm.

The original or V1 of the 12-35mm f2.8 Lumix lens also has O.I.S. built in - but not 'Power OIS' - so it can only be zoomed manually. V2 of the 12-35 I believe has the power option built-in to it. I think you said you have the v2 version of the lens? If so, it probably has a little power zoom - which goes from W (Wide) to T (Telephoto). For people who shoot video, this is useful. For people who don't, like me - well, let's just say, I've never used the 'Power' zoom feature on my 45-175mm lens.

If I remember, Panasonic also makes a fixed f2.8 version of the 35-100mm zoom - which is bigger than the truly tiny one - but has higher optical quality. The big advantage of it, though, was always having a faster fixed aperture - which made it more versatile...but bigger and pricier too.

 

[agentlossing]

It's not the first time I've mentioned this, but I believe there's a missing player in the compact digital field, and it's something with a 40mm-equivalent lens. I was reading about a book Stephen Shore put out called American Surfaces, which I really need to buy now, and which if I read correctly, is mostly or all photos done with a Rollei 35. I have a photo book by a photographer from another forum which is all black and white Rollei 35. And I mainly used the Ricoh 500G on a trip a couple of years ago. What those have in common is that they have a 40mm lens in a really compact body. And a ton of cameras of a certain era were 40mm or very close to it. I love the focal length, I think it gets some of the best shots out of me, forces me to think creatively. And while I love my GR I would go nuts if a 40mm version got announced. There's a purity of a kind to carrying a camera with a 40mm lens. It seems very naturally, but is just right enough to concentrate the photographer on the subject, whether you like it or not. I know there are 35mm options, but there's a difference between a 35mm and a 40mm and I don't want to crop later. I want to HAVE to shoot the frame at 40mm.

Just chalk that up to the fact that nothing's perfect, I guess.

 

[gordo]

I agree with your thoughts. There are times my X100F feels a bit too wide. I've been gravitating towards keeping the 43mm on my K-1 as my go-to lens, changing only when I need something else. The Fuji 27mkII will likely be used on my X-H1 in the same role. I'd love something like an X100 with a 40mm - 43mm FoV.

Of course, everything is mostly up in the air (for me) until announcements on several fronts happen over the next year or so.

 

[MiguelATF]

It's not the first time I've mentioned this, but I believe there's a missing player in the compact digital field, and it's something with a 40mm-equivalent lens. I was reading about a book Stephen Shore put out called American Surfaces, which I really need to buy now, and which if I read correctly, is mostly or all photos done with a Rollei 35. I have a photo book by a photographer from another forum which is all black and white Rollei 35. And I mainly used the Ricoh 500G on a trip a couple of years ago. What those have in common is that they have a 40mm lens in a really compact body. And a ton of cameras of a certain era were 40mm or very close to it. I love the focal length, I think it gets some of the best shots out of me, forces me to think creatively. And while I love my GR I would go nuts if a 40mm version got announced. There's a purity of a kind to carrying a camera with a 40mm lens. It seems very naturally, but is just right enough to concentrate the photographer on the subject, whether you like it or not. I know there are 35mm options, but there's a difference between a 35mm and a 40mm and I don't want to crop later. I want to HAVE to shoot the frame at 40mm.

Just chalk that up to the fact that nothing's perfect, I guess.

Thank you for the reference to the Stephen Shore book, Andrew... I'm going to have to look for it. For quite a few years, my little Rollei 35 was, literally, the ONLY camera I was using and its 40mm field-of-view always felt to me like the best of many worlds, just wide enough to take in many things, but closer enough to the class 50mm to feel more normal. If this forum offered the opportunity to click on both Informative and Agree at the same time, I would have clicked on both, after reading your post.

Continuing to reflect on what you said, it's clarifying a few things for me - including the fact that, for a number of years, my favorite mu43 lens was the 20mm Lumix. I used it for years on several timy Lumix siblings (a GM5 and a GM1) and, like my analog Rollei 35, it always just felt right. I wound up giving the lens to a good friend, a fellow photographer who was in need of a faster and smaller lens - and subsequently discovered I missed it more than any other lens I had previously owned. Finally, I came to my senses, so to speak, and bought another copy, which now lives permanently on my Pen F.

But you're really right: there is a world of difference between 35mm and 40mm. (Of course, there is another world of difference between 28mm and 35mm... but let's save that for another time )

 

[rayvonn]

That seemingly small 5mm additional to a 35mm makes a hell of difference doesn’t it, yeah it’s slightly less wide, obviously so, but it’s more than that, something I can’t quite put my finger on.

 

[tonyturley]

I once had a black Pentax MX with the excellent pancake 40mm f2.8. The MX was a bit rough and the meter didn't work, but photos from that pair were very nice. Still scratching my head as to why I sold that combination.

 

[JensM]

The original or V1 of the 12-35mm f2.8 Lumix lens also has O.I.S. built in - but not 'Power OIS' - so it can only be zoomed manually. V2 of the 12-35 I believe has the power option built-in to it. I think you said you have the v2 version of the lens? If so, it probably has a little power zoom - which goes from W (Wide) to T (Telephoto). For people who shoot video, this is useful. For people who don't, like me - well, let's just say, I've never used the 'Power' zoom feature on my 45-175mm lens.

If I remember, Panasonic also makes a fixed f2.8 version of the 35-100mm zoom - which is bigger than the truly tiny one - but has higher optical quality. The big advantage of it, though, was always having a faster fixed aperture - which made it more versatile...but bigger and pricier too.

Not to sure about the different versions of OIS, I know some of the latter lenses has gotten an upgrade and combined with the IBIS gives the full effect of stabilisation, with the later houses. It could possibly be that there are zoom options going through the house, but there are no external zoom button on the MkII of the 12-35 I have.

I have some hankerings towards the 35-100 f:2.8, but that has more to do with it being what it is, a classic in its own right, than any actual need for it. It would make for a delightful travel set with the GX9 and the 12-35, at a weight of 1069 grams or slightly less than 38 ounces imperial.

 

[agentlossing]

Thank you for the reference to the Stephen Shore book, Andrew... I'm going to have to look for it. For quite a few years, my little Rollei 35 was, literally, the ONLY camera I was using and its 40mm field-of-view always felt to me like the best of many worlds, just wide enough to take in many things, but closer enough to the class 50mm to feel more normal. If this forum offered the opportunity to click on both Informative and Agree at the same time, I would have clicked on both, after reading your post.

Continuing to reflect on what you said, it's clarifying a few things for me - including the fact that, for a number of years, my favorite mu43 lens was the 20mm Lumix. I used it for years on several timy Lumix siblings (a GM5 and a GM1) and, like my analog Rollei 35, it always just felt right. I wound up giving the lens to a good friend, a fellow photographer who was in need of a faster and smaller lens - and subsequently discovered I missed it more than any other lens I had previously owned. Finally, I came to my senses, so to speak, and bought another copy, which now lives permanently on my Pen F.

But you're really right: there is a world of difference between 35mm and 40mm. (Of course, there is another world of difference between 28mm and 35mm... but let's save that for another time )

I find it funny that there was a period of time where the fixed-lens compact scale- and rangefinder-focusing consumer market was all 40mm, or very close to it (the Konica C35 I had for a little while was 38mm I think, some Minoltas were 42mm), because I feel like it's such a valuable focal length, and I know there are others, like you, Miguel, who feel the same - but it's harder to find now. Some formats have well-loved 40mm lenses, others do not. I was a big fan of the Panasonic 20mm too, though I do think ~40mm in 4:3 format is a bit different than on 3:2, but it's close enough to still offer the good stuff.

35mm allows you to just shoot and get it all, or enough of it to matter. It's like a less fussy 28mm. 40mm is more like a 50mm that gets more in the frame. I just find composing with 40mm to be much more satisfying than with a 35mm.

Maybe this is a roundabout way of saying that I've been thinking of getting the Voigtlander 40mm Nokton for my Bessa-T.