Home
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

GF1 with three fast lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 6:55 pm    Post subject: GF1 with three fast lenses Reply with quote

I am not sure wether Lumix GF1 is a rangefinder camera or not, but the lenses I used today are
all qualified for RF. Did some comparison shots, including Planar 55/1.2 and Yahsica ML 55/1.2.
But not included those SLR's lenses in here. There are all at wide open shots, slightly reddish cast
in these images are due to a red cape hanging from the black chair in the back ground not in images.

click the photo to enlarge as usual

The first one is Canon 50/1.2 L-mount, failed for veiling flare test (don't dismiss this lens because of this, it is a kind f nice lens thou)

But the resolution is there 100% crop


The second candidate is Konica Hexanon 50/1.2 (ten time more expensive than C50/1.2 above)

100% crop


Third entry is Cosina Voigtlander NOKTON 50/1.1 (half the price of Hexanon 50/1.2 Very Happy)

100% crop


Those last two are doing quite well, comparable to or not worse than Contax Planar 55/1.2 IMO.
You cannot see much of difference between the last two, even closed down (I did F1.4, 2, 2.8, 4, 5.6, and 8 shots too).

These images are all Jpeg output from my GF1, but I think JPEG images is a bit better than PS's raw converter output
and also SilkyPix raw converter which is supplied by Panasonic as a part of the pakage. SilkyPix can convert only
GF1's raw file, what a stingy Pana!

Whatever Thom Hogan is saying, I am having fun. Cool


PostPosted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 7:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Hex is set to be a legend I think.
I was very lucky to get mine for only $400 more than the Nokton f1.1 .
Mine is # 1835 .

Koji are you saying that ACR does not support the GF1 Raw files yet?
I remeber waiting for the LX3 Raw support which took to long.
BTW Apple ApertureII which is an excellent program overall still has no support for either LX3 or the New m4/3 cameras. Sad

I did not like silkypix. It's very clunky for a 2009 program.
Rolling Eyes


PostPosted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 7:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ACR supports GF1' raw file, yes. What I do not like is in general
ACR's result is a bit too dark for me for GF1's files. In other cases
ACR does a good job, but not always comparing with C1(V4), which
gives better results for the most of cases. Of course you can fix
these one by one, but do not like to spend the time.

But mostly ACR's results are too shallow/bright for me, so I stopped
using a long ago.

I am waiting for C1's support for Pana's G1, GH1, and GF1.
In the mean time I may upgrade to version 5 from current 4,
though not a PRO version. Although a PRO version can fix now
distortion, CA, and some skin smoothing/rendition, oh and
eliminating dust spots from the images. This is nice, my PS
use is 90% for this censor dust removing... Crying or Very sad

I killed three mouses in doing this so far. Very Happy


Last edited by koji on Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:49 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Addenda:

I should make clear, those differences are not scientific more to
my personal preference. So its ranking is now strictly for GF1's images

Jpeg_output from GF1 > SilkyPix's result > ACR's result

I am talking about the result only here, yes Silky's ignorance about
MPU(or multi-cores) is horrible and no excuse today. And its interface
is not too obvious. In this sense ACR's is so much better, though
I did not use CR4 so far. I did use a demo "Aperture" program before
the big change, and same time I was using DPR from Canon came with
EOS_5D.

But I loved the result from C1(LE) came with M8, then gradually use it
for every RAW files from different makers including Nikon's.


Last edited by koji on Tue Nov 03, 2009 2:44 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 11:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

hi Koji

I have tested the Canon FD 50 f1.2 (not L) on FF and this lens is quite good even wide open...

I think it's better at f1.2 in low-light than Distagon 1.4/35 (don't tell this to Orio, please Smile ! )

I would say one thing ---

I'd like to TRY OUT the LEGENDARY Planar 1.2/55 in my hands

-- please, tell me what you feel when holding this lens in your hands... !

It must be a dream...

thanks

tf


PostPosted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 2:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Trifox,

It is big and heavy. Very Happy

I have FD 55/1.2 converted EF mount too, but
Planar 55/1.2 is a class by itself. When you use it
on 5D, I do not think it fetches the goodies of the lens.
I am not sure with 5D mkII neither. Maybe with D3x
it may, but alas it is not possible.


PostPosted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 10:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for the comparison shots. It's a good way to see a number of different aspects of lenses. For me, the difference in loCA between the 50L and the other two is striking. Always nice to be aware of that before expensive lenses.


PostPosted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 12:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Amazing!


PostPosted: Sat Jan 23, 2010 12:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

koji

Fabulous samples of some extraordinary lenses


patrickh


PostPosted: Mon Jan 25, 2010 10:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Agree, fabulous samples and that Hex is something else! Shocked