[Leica] 4/3 Adapters

[pklein at threshinc.com (Peter Klein)]

I'm not Harrison either, but I find the micro 4/3 very useful and a 
compliment to my M8.  I now use a Panasonic G1 for most SLR-ish things, 
and when I want to shoot a quick JPG snap.

I bought the G1 for its viewfinder, rather than go for the smaller but 
viewfinderless GF1.  The kit zoom is very good--slow, but better than 
the kit zooms that come with most low to medium end DSLRS.  The 40/1.7 
is stellar. The camera's image acuity and dynamic range are not up to 
Leica M8/9 standards, but quite decent.  You can put almost any lens you 
want on it.  Now, manual focusing with 3rd party lenses is dicey for 
wide lenses, and it's not for fast situations.  I've used the G1 with an 
Olympus OM 50/1.4 in the theatre, with good results. A few 
quick-and-dirty test shots using a 50/3.5 OM macro looked promising. I 
could see that the VC 50/1.5 Nokton and Summilux ASPH rendered 
noticeably sharper than the 50/1.4 OM (all wide open), so the sensor can 
show differences at that level.

When I went to British Columbia, Canada this summer, I took the G1, kit 
zoom, 40/1.7 and my VC 90/3.5 Lanthar as a "poor man's 180" telephoto.  
I was pleased with the results.  Focusing the 90 took time, but with the 
10x electronic magnifier in the viewfinder, I could actually focus 
*better* than with a real DSLR.  As Nathan mentions, the longer the 
lens, the more "jittery" the viewfinder image becomes, which can make 
focusing a slow process.  On a tripod, it would be easier. Propping your 
elbows on something helps. I try to keep the shutter speed up because 
the G1 has no image stabilization, perhaps the one of the Olympus m-4/3 
bodies with IS would do a bit better.

The main issue was not image quality, it was shutter lag and viewfinder 
blackout. If I had time to focus and the subject wasn't fast-moving, the 
G1 was just fine.  Here are a few samples with the G1 and 90/3.5.

<http://www.flickr.com/photos/24844563 at 
N04/4968558728/sizes/o/in/photostream/>
<http://www.flickr.com/photos/24844563 at 
N04/4931633772/sizes/o/in/photostream/>
<http://www.flickr.com/photos/24844563 at 
N04/4931633776/sizes/o/in/photostream/>
<http://www.flickr.com/photos/24844563 at 
N04/4995371422/sizes/o/in/photostream/>

I do have to say, though, that the real joy of micro-4/3 is when you use 
the native lenses and have autofocus. Macro or telephoto with a 3rd 
party lens is quite doable, but with some PITA factor. I personally 
would not use a m-4/3 camera with a Leica lens as a street shooter.  As 
a travel camera, with a Leica 50 or 90 for occasional telephoto work, 
it's great.

--Peter


> 2010-12-28-22:35:40 Geoff Hopkinson:
> > Harrison ... Do you consider that the 90 with adapter on your G2
> > gives better results than cropping the same FoV from that lens on
> > your M9? You are able to manage critical focus effectively?
>
> I'm far from being Harrison, but I'll jump in here anyway.  I've used
> various Leica glass on the DMC-GF1, and my experience is that:
>
>  - A micro-4/3-sized crop from a *similarly exposed*, *properly focused*
>    M9 photo with the same lens always seems to look better than I'd
>    get from the GF1.  The M9, despite the rep CCD sensors have in some
>    circles, is definitely lower-noise in dim light than the GF1, and
>    in good light the pixels just seem to... look better.
>
>  - The micro-4/3, on the other hand, excels at nailing exact focus
>    (since you can focus by eye with the magnified actual pixels from
>    the sensor).  This is something I'm not always able to count on
>    with an M and fast lenses 75mm or longer.  You can also compose
>    with SLR precision, and you get an electronic light boost when
>    peering through the dim.  And note that the currently-rare,
>    just-coming-out DMC-GH2, while sold largely for its video
>    capabilities, is a higher-resolution and lower-noise still camera
>    than its predecessors.
>
>  -Jeff
>