Panasonic Hands the DMC-GH3 to Pros To Generate Sample Images and Videos

 

Panasonic DMC-GH3

Image Source: http://shop.panasonic.com/shop/model/DMC-GH3KBODY

 
The newly-announced Lumix DMC-GH3 takes its place as the flagship camera in the Panasonic line. The new body design is weatherproof, and larger than previous Lumix Micro 4/3 bodies. While larger than say the G3, it is still more compact than DSLRs, and approximately half the weight. In addition, the smaller lenses will still make a GH3 kit significantly smaller and lighter than an equivalent DSLR kit.
 
The most important room for improvement in Micro 4/3 is low noise, high iso performance. Since I shoot a lot of low light situations, especially in my live music project, this is where I'd love to see more progress. However, I want to start by saying that last year's state-of-the-art isn't bad. Here's an example of a shot I took recently with the DMC-G3 at iso 3200, in a very dimly lit venue.
 

Greg Ruby, by Reed A. George

Panasonic Lumix DMC-G3, Olympus 75mm f1.8 Lens

iso 3200, f1.8, 1/100 sec

 
In the shot above, I was forced to shoot at iso 3200, even with the fast f1.8 Olympus lens. At 1/100 second exposure, I'm pushing the fastest shutter speed that can be shot with the camera handheld (carefully) with this lens. Since the 75mm has an equivalent field of view as a 150mm lens on 35mm format, ~1/150 second is the slowest speed that can reliably be handheld.
 
The new DMC-GH3 reportedly significantly improves high iso performance, with regular iso settings up to 12,800 and extended 25,600 capability. The question is - what do the images look like at these settings?
 
Panasonic handed the GH3 to six imaging professionals to generate samples. Bruce Logan, Philip Bloom, and Elliot Rosenblatt worked on video, while Ira Block, Daniel Berehulak, and Kazuo Unno focused on still images.
 
(Click Here) to see the results on Panasonic's special GH3 site.
 
Ira Block shares a variety of images from the American West, including a very nice night landscape, shot at iso 2500 and a shutter opening of 30 seconds! Quite nice.
 
Daniel Berehulak documented Muslim life in India. He includes a couple of shots at iso 1250 that are very low in apparent noise.
 
Kazuo Unno focused his (macro) lens on the insect world.
 
I still look forward to seeing some images shot at iso 3200 and higher. I sure would love to have a Lumix camera that could come close to matching the high iso performance of my full-frame Nikon D700!
 
DMC-365.blogspot.com
 
 

Another Convert - Canon-to-Micro 4/3 - tconelly Shoots Barcelona With OM-D

 

Madrid, by tconelly on mu-43.com

Image Source: http://www.mu-43.com/f56/e-m5-travel-performance-barcelona-29520/

 
One of the main reasons I like Micro 4/3 is for compactness. That especially comes into play in travel.
 
tconelly on mu-43.com has converted from a Canon DSLR kit to an Olympus OM-D and large selection of lenses, including the Panasonic Lumix 20mm f1.7.
 
(Click Here) to read the post on mu-43.com, where tconelly describes the difference in size and weight of what he was able to carry on trips with Canon vs. Olympus.
 
On his Madrid trip, he shot a lot of images, and provides links to them. I would suggest at least going to his condensed set of the whole trip.
 
(Click Here) to see that photo set on pbase.
 
It's hard to imagine that he would have been more pleased with the results if he'd carried a larger camera.
 
Now I want to go to Madrid, as well. :)
 
DMC-365.blogspot.com
 
 

Jordan Steele's Thoughts On The Panasonic Lumix 12-35mm f2.8 and Olympus 75mm f1.8 Lenses

 

Panasonic Lumix 12-35mm f2.8 Zoom

Image Source: http://admiringlight.com/blog/thoughts-panasonic-12-35-olympus-75-18/

 
Jordan Steele, who runs the blog Admiring Light, has posted his initial thoughts on the two new lenses on my mind - the Lumix 12-35mm f2.8 zoom and the Olympus 75mm f1.8 telephoto.
 
(Click Here) to read Jordan's piece on Admiring Light.
 
First, on the Lumix zoom, Jordan remarks on the common complaints from prospective users: price and lack of shallow depth of field. Keep in mind, none (or nearly none) of these people has had the opportuntiyt to try or even see the lens. Price is what it is. I think $1300 is a lot for a normal range zoom, even at f2.8. However, it's lower than the equivalent from Nikon. Of course, the Nikon lens is designed to cover a full 35mm frame, so there's more glass in the Nikon. Anyway, most people don't get into photography to save money. Second, depth of field. The issue is that with the smaller sensor (compared to 35mm) used in the Micro 4/3 cameras, shallow depth of field requires a wider aperture at any given focal length. In layman's terms, it's harder to get out of focus backgrounds, which is desirable for portraits and other images where you want to focus attention to the foreground subject. Yes, it's true. The Physics don't lie. You can't get the same shallow depth of field at f2.8 that you get on a full-frame lens. However, with the zoom at 35mm focal length (the longest setting), which is what you'll use for portraits much of the time, the depth of field will be plenty shallow in my opinion. In fact, I see an awful lot of portraits where the photographers take shallow depth of field too far - the subject's eyes are in focus, but their nose is not. Too far. Anyway, I understand that it's always good to be able to get shallower depth of field. I'll make that trade for the smaller form factor of Micro 4/3 cameras.
 
Next, the Olympus 75mm f1.8. There will be no problem with shallow depth of field here. At f1.8, it should be very shallow. This is one lens I can't wait to try. I sure wish I could have one this weekend for the music festival I'm planning to attend.
 
These reviews, including mine, from people who have yet to touch the lens, are of very limited value. We can discuss what we can surmise from the specifications (which is actually quite a lot), but we cannot see the more subjective features that are part of loving or hating any lens or camera.
 
I'm still on the fence about the 12-35mm, but fully expect to be able to give a hands-on review and samples from the 75mm f1.8 very soon. As soon as it's available for purchase, that is.
 
DMC-365.blogspot.com
 
 

Shooting Rangefinder-Style With Micro 4/3

 

dixeyk's Emulation of Rangefinder Style Shooting on Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF2

Image Source: http://www.mu-43.com/f35/how-approximate-my-old-compact-rfs-27412/

dixeyk has written a post over on mu-43.com about recapturing the shooting style of classic rangefinder cameras with Micro 4/3 gear.

(Click Here) to read the full post.

I have referenced dixeyk's posts before. We seem to have similar interests in our photography. The goal was to set up a modern Micro 4/3 camera to allow a shooting style similar to a classic film rangefinder. Of course, the best way to get that is to have a digital Leica (or perhaps the Fuji XPro 1?), but that was not available.

The characteristics that dixeyk went for, as far as I can interpret, were a compact kit, fast (wide aperture) lenses, and fast focus (as one can achieve through manual focus on a rangefinder camera). For this, he chose to use a Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF2 and the Lumix 20mm f1.7 as his normal lens. He also used Lumix 14mm f2.5 and Olympus 45mm f1.8 lenses, approximating a 28, 40, and 90mm field of view on a classic rangefinder. So far, I would have made similar choices, using my Lumix DMC-GF1 (another Lumix body without an internal viewfinder) and Lumix 20mm f1.7 lens.

Now here's where we go different ways. In dixeyk's case, he decided to shoot with the LCD and autofocus, utilizing the camera's ability to touch focus and shoot. This allows the user to pinpoint where in the field of view they want to focus by touching the LCD screen. As soon as focus is achieved, the camera automatically releases the shutter, capturing the image. I can see how this would feel similar to the fast focus and capture capability of a classic rangefinder.

For my own approach, especially in street photography, my favorite use of a rangefinder, I go in a completely different direction. I turn off the LCD, mount a 35mm optical finder (an old Russian version in my case) in the camera's flash shoe, and use hyperfocal settings to give a lot of depth of field. For information on that,

(Click Here) to see my previous post on setting hyperfocal distance on Panasonic Micro 4/3 cameras.

I find that the 35mm finder closely approximates the field of view of the 20mm f1.7 Lumix lens.
 
I use the exact same finder on my smaller Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5, which provides for directly setting zone focus in the manual focusing screen. In actuality, the LX5 does a better job of emulating a rangefinder than the GF1, in my opinion. It has a great scale to show the focus distance and depth of field, will allow you to lock the zoom at any focal length and the f-stop at any setting. It is a super-quick little camera for street photography.
 
(Click Here) to see my post on my LX5 street kit.
 
I will give dixeyk's approach a try. I think the main differences are in what each of us is trying to achieve. He's working toward quick response pinpoint focus and capture, while I'm working toward large depth of field, quick response street photography with a rangefinder camera.
 
Fun stuff.
 
DMC-365.blogspot.com
 
 
 

Pro Photographer Giulio Sciorio Writes About Professional Use of Micro 4/3 Equipment

 

Image Source: http://blog.giuliosciorio.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/fear.jpg

 
 
Professional photographer Giulio Sciorio has posted a piece on his blog about the barriers (both real and psychological) to other professionals adopting Micro 4/3 camera gear for their pro work. I will review his main points below.
 
 
(Click Here) to read Giulio's full post.
 
 
Giulio outlines the following five barriers to professional adoption of Micro 4/3 equipment:
 
 

1. It's not "professional" gear.
2. There aren't enough megapixels.
3. The noise levels are too high.
4. It's not full-frame!
5. Worries about what your professional colleagues will think.

First, Giulio identifies the concern over your clients not being impressed by the appearance of your gear, because it's not big, heavy, and expensive looking, as a real concern. He explains how he did two things to overcome this. First, he shot a series of street portraits with his Olympus Pen, and showed them to others before explaining what equipment they were made with. Second, he carried his Pen with his "professional" Canon gear, and impressed clients with shots made with the Micro 4/3 gear. For me, this is not a concern. That's because I don't really have clients. If anyone is interested in my photographs, it's because of the photographs, not the equipment. I'm not hired to cover any specific events, in general. If I were, I may try Giulio's "bring it along with the Pro gear" approach. Second, "there aren't enough megapixels." Giulio explains that even large format magazines need only around 9 Mp for a full page image. As for me, I would argue that there are too many megapixels in some cases. More megapixels = more noise (see "Third..." below). And, since megapixels are the universal language of camera marketers, having too few will never be an issue. Third, noise. Giulio handles this one through the simple statement that while his Micro 4/3 images do have more noise than full 24x36mm sensor cameras, he has never had a complaint from a client. He considers it part of the rendering style of the gear. For me, the noise concern has some truth to it. Back to megapixels, if my Lumix DMC-G3 could achieve the same noise performance as my Nikon D700 24x36mm sensor camera, I'd happily give up any extra megapixels. From my point of view, the noise issue improves with every iteration of Micro 4/3 sensor design, and is now well under control for most print sizes, and certainly for images on the computer screen. Now that the technology has gotten to this point, I see this concern as the same one that photographers used to have to make regarding 35mm versus medium or large format film. The Micro 4/3 kit has become my 35mm film equivalent, and is every bit as capable, in my opinion, with lots of advantages. The Nikon D700 is my medium format equivalent. If I'm worried about making super large prints or approaching perfection, I can decide to carry the big, heavy Nikon.

The fourth concern is "it's not full-frame!" Giulio makes a great case on this one. Of course it's full-frame. Full-frame is all relative. If you really want to argue, 24x36mm (35mm "full-frame") is not full-frame to a medium format film photographer. It's the image quality that counts. I totally agree with Giulio on this point.
 
 
The fifth, final concern is "what will my colleagues think?" Giulio's point here is that it's not your colleagues' opinion that counts. It's your clients.
 
 
I have experienced this one, even though I'm not a pro. One of my good friends is an ardent Nikon DSLR user. He asked me
 
 
"What does Lumix give you that Nikon doesn't? What got you started with it?"
 
 
Well, I have to admit, this got me thinking. What really got me into Micro 4/3 was the ability to adapt legacy lenses. That's a minor advantage for me, now that there are great native Micro 4/3 primes. What really sold me was size, weight, reduction in back pain. What keeps me in Micro 4/3 is the awesome progress it has made recently. One final note on this. It is my belief that being a photographer who takes a different approach, one that is not initially accepted in the professional community, has a history of ultimate success. Just look at the Leica. Pros turned their noses up, with very similar concerns about the "small format" of 35mm film that we hear today about Micro 4/3. Then they saw the images that could be made with a small, flexible, fast camera. The rest is history.
 
 
Giulio's article was thought provoking and useful for me.
 
 

Sumo Crossing, by Reed A. George

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF1, Lumix 20mm f1.7 lens

iso100, f5.6, 1/100 sec

 
One of the things I love about this image is that the sign on the store across the street, which sells sumo souvenirs and the like, has a sign that reads "Kingu Saizu" in Japanese ("King Size" in English).
 
Small, fast cameras are fun and productive.
 
DMC-365.blogspot.com
 
 
 
DMC-365.blogspot.com
 

Useful Article on Printing Resolution at digitalphotopro.com

 

Table Source: http://www.digitalphotopro.com/technique/workflow/the-right-resolution.html

How do you decide what print resolution to use when printing your digital files? Do you always just set it to 300 dpi and forget it? Just use the native resolution of the image? I have known that you can get by with lower resolution printing for larger images, but didn't really know how to calibrate that. I have also learned the trick of increasing resolution to 360 dpi when I make large prints of smaller resolution images.

(Click Here) to read the whole article, which leads me to somewhat different conclusions.

First off, the table above. This table reinforces the idea that you can get by with lower print resolutions for larger prints. For example, a 3.5" x 5" print is normally viewed from 10-12" distance, meaning about 300 dpi is correct.

However, this article finds that there is benefit in printing to 360 dpi resolution with Epson printers (mine is Epson), 300 dpi for Canon, regardless of final print size. So, conclusion 1 is that you should print at 360 dpi for any print size, even if your file isn't that high in resolution. The article explains how to do this from Lightroom.

The second conclusion is that if your original file is even higher resolution than the Epson native resolution of 360 dpi at the size you want to print, you should NOT decrease the resolution. In fact, you may benefit from increasing the resolution to 720 dpi, if you have an Epson Pro printer, which has a maximum detail resolution of 720 dpi.

This article goes far in demonstrating the differences, yet results in simple conclusions. Very helpful.

DMC-365.blogspot.com


 
 

The Lumix 14-140mm f4-5.8 Super Zoom - User Reports

Panasonic Lumix 14-140mm f4-5.8 Zoom Lens
Image Source: http://shop.panasonic.com/shop/model/H-VS014140
 
Recently on mu-43.com, user Z-man posted an inquiry about practical impressions of the Panasonic Lumix 14-140mm f4-5.7 zoom lens.
 
(Click Here) to see the post and numerous informed replies.
 
I have this lens, and offered this feedback:
 

I find the 14-140 useful, with some limitations.I used to have the 14-45 kit lens and the 45-200, both quite nice for what they are. I should say here that I found the 45-200 to be a step better in my hands than either the 14-45 or 14-140. It was tough to give up, until the 100-300 showed up.I prefer to shoot primes most of the time. However, when I travel, I usually want a lens that I can be sure will cover most circumstances, especially when I'm with family or friends who aren't primarily photographers. That is my most common use of the lens. I agree that it doesn't gather much light, so that's the biggest limitation there.My other big use is for a telephoto for travel. Sometimes the Pana-Leica 45mm Macro-Elmarit just doesn't have enough reach. The 14-140 works well in that situation as well. It is not the sharpest lens at the extreme long end, but sure isn't bad. For me, the 100-300 is a specialty lens, one that comes in handy for birds and nature, especially. I don't carry it on travel very often.So, in summary, I find the 14-140 is in my bag quite often. Second only to my primes.   I also forgot to mention that the Optical Image Stabilization (OIS) works very well in my experience, though I have heard opinions that differ. Also, this lens is optimized to minimize noise during video capture - not important for me, but crucial for those who shoot a lot of video. DMC-365.blogspot.com

This Would Have Been the Day I Forgot My Camera

Image Source: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1041&message=41214002

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF2, Lumix 20mm f1.7 Lens

Poster Nome_Alaska on dpreview posted this shot of the morning traffic in his homeland. I can't remember the last time a moose held me up on my way to work here in Virginia.

(Click Here) to read the original post.

Sometimes, you just want to be sure to have a camera, any camera, on hand to document your day. These couple of images could have been made with a point and shoot, or an iPhone. The important thing is to have a camera with you.

On those days when you see something creatively intriguing, something you would like to develop artistically, rather than just documentation, it's nice to have a better camera. The Micro 4/3 kit presents a nice compromise in size and capability in that case. Nome_Alaska's GF2 is a very small camera, and the 20mm f1.7 an excellent, bright, sharp, fast lens. Easy to carry, highly capable kit.

It's fun to see how our days differ from those we're connected to by the internet.

DMC-365.blogspot.com

 

 

Civil War in Virginia - Shot With Panasonic Lumix 14-42mm Kit Lens

 

Union Solder at Mount Zion Church, Aldie, Virginia, by Reed A. George

Panasonic Lumix DMC-G3, Lumix 14-42mm f3.5-5.6 Kit Zoom

iso160, f5.5, 1/400 sec

I recently attended a local civil war event with my good friend Stan. Stan happens to be an avid Nikon photographer, and a Historian.

We attended an event entitled "Mosby: A Scout Along the Turnpike," which included three distinct historical sites here in Northern Virginia. The first stop for us was at the historic Mount Zion Church in Aldie, where we received detailed descriptions from re-enactors (one playing John S. Mosby, the famous guerilla leader fighting for the confederacy in the area, and another playing a Union soldier, above). The church, built in 1851, at various times in the civil war served as the first rendezvous site for Mosby and his Rangers, a field hospital, a barracks, a prison, and an actual site of military action. Union troops convalescing in the church as field hospital left graffiti on the walls that remains today. Also at this first site was a nice display of period-style weapons, like those shown below.

Muzzle-loading Springfield Rifle, by Reed A. George

Panasonic Lumix DMC-G3, Lumix 14-42mm f3.5-5.6 Kit Zoom

iso160, f7.1, 1/500 sec

Colt and Remington-Style Pistols, by Reed A. George

Panasonic Lumix DMC-G3, Lumix 14-42mm f3.5-5.6 Kit Zoom

iso160, f7.1, 1/500 sec

The next stop on our tour was the Aldie Mill. The mill was owned and operated during the civil war by John Moore, who was genuinely against Virginia's secession from the Union, which put him in a bad situation with his mostly-rebel neighbors. He explained how because there was no room for neutrality in this part of the country during the war, both armies caused him problems at one time or another.

Miller John Moore, by Reed A. George

Panasonic Lumix DMC-G3, Lumix 14-42mm f3.5-5.6 Kit Zoom

iso400, f6.3, 1/350 sec

The old mill is still operational, and was running for the event. Here are a couple of shots from inside the mill.

 

Mill Works, by Reed A. George

Panasonic Lumix DMC-G3, Lumix 14-42mm f3.5-5.6 Kit Zoom

iso800, f4, 1/40 sec

 

 

Grain Detail, by Reed A. George

Panasonic Lumix DMC-G3, Lumix 14-42mm f3.5-5.6 Kit Zoom

iso200, f5.3, 1/160 sec

The final highlight of the Mill site was a slave's tale of the "Aldie Races," where Union soldiers nearly freed Aldie slaves. They had a glimpse of freedom before being returned to their Rebel owners.

Glimpse of Freedom, by Reed A. George

Panasonic Lumix DMC-G3, Lumix 14-42mm f3.5-5.6 Kit Zoom

iso200, f5.4, 1/50 sec

The final stop on our tour was at the Caleb Rector House at Atoka. In this house, John Mosby formed his group of rangers in 1863. Our interpretor at this site impressed upon us how similar Loudoun County is today to what the Rangers knew 150 years ago. He stated that you could drop any one of the rangers in Western Loudoun County today, and they would know exactly where they were.

Rector House Interpreter, by Reed A. George

Panasonic Lumix DMC-G3, Lumix 14-42mm f3.5-5.6 Kit Zoom

Nissin Di466 flash (bounced)

iso160, f5.6, 1/160 sec

 

That wrapped up our civil war lesson for the day. It is great fun to have access to motivated historians with a depth of knowledge of our local history. Each site has its own special charms. For me, the mill is really something. The fact that it is still operational after all this time is very impressive.

 

That said, the church is also deeply interesting, with a cemetery that holds remains of both Union and Confederate soldiers within its walls, and approximately 60 unmarked African American graves just outside. While the Primitive Baptists allowed African Americans to worship in the church, they were always separate, with the whites seated downstairs, and the African Americans upstairs. This separation extended to the burial grounds.

 

Now on to the photographic discussion. I decided to limit myself to a single lens on this trip, the Panasonic Lumix 14-42mm f4-5.6 kit lens. I must admit, I regretted this during the day, and it cost me some nice available light shots inside all three sites, particularly the mill. I found the slowness of the f-stop particularly limiting; it has been a long time since I used a kit zoom for any length of time. And this was a bright sunny day, so conditions don't get much better for a lens of this type.

 

I find the image quality acceptable, but qualitatively lower than I would have gotten with the much more expensive Lumix 14-140 f4-5.8. That's not surprising, given the difference in price. However, since I have the 14-140, the only advantage of the 14-42 would be size, which to me is not worth the trade off in image quality. The 14-140 is not that big, after all. And, if I want small, I'll go for the Lumix 20mm f1.7.

 

In summary, I'll say that the 14-42 is acceptable for a kit lens, but any other native Micro 4/3 lens will yield better image quality. I'll also say that over-constraining myself was instructive, but did cost me a decent image or two.

 

For comparison, and a nice post about the Nikon 18-55mm kit zoom, see this post by my friend Graham Serretta over on Nelson Foto:

 

(Click Here) for the post on Nikon's kit lens.

 

I hope you find the history interesting, and the photography notes useful. It was a great day out for me!

 

DMC-365.blogspot.com

 

 

 

 

 

Dave Martinez's Micro 4/3 "Trinity" Travel Kit - What's In Your Bag?

Some of us don't want to look like this when we travel with our photography gear. Heaven knows I've injured my back with Nikon DSLR kit, especially when I had a carrying-age child with me. Things are better now - she's independently mobile, and I have Micro 4/3 gear!

Image Source: http://nistido.tumblr.com/

Fellow blogger Dave Martinez writes that his normal travel kit is now a Panasonic Lumix DMC-G3, Lumix 7-14mm f4 (wish I had one of those), Lumix 20mm f1.7, and Olympus 45mm f1.8 (another great lens I don't have). This covers a huge range of focal lengths, and makes for an amazingly small carry-on bag.

(Click Here) to read Dave's post.

I wrote last week about what I recently carried on an overseas trip.

(Click Here) to see that post.

I tend to like fast prime lenses, so my normal travel kit is now two DMC-G3s, Lumix 14mm f2.5, Pana-Leica 25mm f1.4 Summilux, and Pana-Leica 45mm f2.8 Macro-Elmarit. The Oly 45mm is faster (2x more light gathering capability than the Pana-Leica), but the Pana-Leica has macro capability. I find I use that quite often on travel. I also typically throw in the Lumix 14-140mm f4-5.8 zoom, just because it covers so much ground in a single lens. And sometimes, I want more reach than the 45mm offers. Having a second body really adds very little weight, and provides a back-up in case of camera problems. It is also nice to have a wide or normal lens on one, tele on the other, minimizing the need to change lenses in the moment. This whole kit, two bodies and four lenses, fits easily in a padded messenger bag, which even has room for filters and other accessories. Pretty nice. Of course, a tripod is extra.

If I want to save a little space, I may use the Lumix 20mm f1.7 instead of the Summilux. Both lenses are great, in my opinion.

See below for links to the messenger bag and padded liner that I prefer. They fit together perfectly, even though they're provided by different manufacturerers.

My next decision is whether or not to carry a flash.

Anyone else have a favorite travel kit? Share what's in your bag!

DMC-365.blogspot.com

 

 

Hey Mister, What's in the Bag? Or, What I Took on My Spring Vacation

So, I got into Micro 4/3 camera gear in large part due to the compactness of the system. I used to carry around a very heavy bag of Nikon gear, which consisted of one body and a few lenses, flash, etc. Because I didn't want to be changing lenses in the field all the time, and could only carry one body, I depended largely on zooms, usually with one fast normal prime along for the ride.

 

So, what has Micro 4/3 done for me in terms of my travel kit? Maybe this will give you an idea:

 

My Travel Kit - LowePro CompuTrekker AW,

Giottos MT9241 Tripod, Velbon QHD-41 Mini Ballhead

While this is the same backpack I used with Nikon, what I carry inside, and the resulting weight, is very different. Being able to use a small travel tripod and mini ballhead is an immediate advantage of lightweight camera equipment.

Here's what's inside:

Travel Kit, Exploded

Let's see here:

• Panasonic Lumix DMC-G3 bodies (2X), batteries (4x)
• Panasonic Lumix 14-140 f4-5.8 zoom
• Panasonic Lumix 14mm f2.5
• Pana-Leica 25mm f1.4 Summilux
• Pana-Leica 45mm f2.8 Macro-Elmarit
• Panasonic 46mm filters (2X - 1 Polarizer, 1 3 stop ND)
• Nissin Di466 flash
• Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5, batteries (3X)
• Panasonic Lumix DMC-TS3 waterproof camera, batteries (2X)
• LowePro Messenger Bag (fits inside Computrekker AW)
• Mountainsmith Camera Cube (padded divider pack, fits inside messenger bag)
• Panasonic remote shutter release
• Apple iPad2
• Shutterhat camera rain protector
• Hakuba mini-tripod
• SD cards, pen and paper, passports, etc.

All of this together, including the Giottos tripod, weighs in at 19 lbs. I don't have a weight for the Nikon pack, but imagine it's quite a bit more.

While this pack is not exactly lightweight, there is significant capability and redundancy here. For a big, expensive trip, that's what I want. Having two interchangeable lens bodies makes me much more comfortable. Not only that, it allows me to shoot mostly with primes, which I really prefer. I found on this trip that I kept the 25mm Summilux on one of the G3s, and alternated between the 14mm and 45mm on the other. I only used the zoom a couple of times, when I wanted longer reach than the 45mm would afford.

What would I leave out if I were going again tomorrow? Not much, actually. I would probably leave out the LX5, but that said, I did use it exclusively for a day of family activities. Yes, I could have used one of the other cameras, but the LX5 sure is a great balance of size and capability. I may leave out the flash. I don't use flash a lot, and they do weigh quite a bit, especially with an extra set of batteries. I might leave out the 14-140 zoom.

The fact that the padded messenger bag fits inside the Computrekker is great. That allows me to only be a packhorse for the whole kit when I'm making major moves between hotels, etc. Once on location, I can put just what I need in the messenger bag, and travel much more lightly.

The DMC-TS3 turned out to be fun on this trip, as I did shoot a few underwater pics. I'll post those in the coming days.

So, I hope you can see that I have a lot more capability with Micro 4/3, at reasonable carrying weight. If I were to limit it to one body, a couple of zooms, and a single fast prime, it would really be a lightweight kit. Sometimes, while my back is aching, I do feel that I challenged myself to fill the volume of the Computrekker.

What do you think? Am I over-prepared for an overseas one week trip? Under-prepared? What would you pack differently? I'm always interested to learn from others.

 

DMC-365.blogspot.com

Fisheye Lens Decisions

 

Image Source: http://www.dslrphoto.com/wp-content/plugins/feedlist/Samyang_75mm.jpg

I want a fisheye lens. Because I know that I won't use it a lot, I would like an economical, compact option. Fisheye lenses provide incredible wide angles of view (~180 degrees!), which can make for some very interesting interior and nature images. However, they exhibit a large amount of distortion, and are really specialty lenses, not the kind of thing you're going to use every day.

Panasonic makes the 8mm f3.5 fisheye lens, which sells on Amazon for $629. This lens gets very good reviews, and I'm sure is best in class for usage with the Lumix Micro 4/3 cameras.

In January, I wrote about the announcement of the new DMW-GFC1 fisheye attachment from Panasonic.

(Click Here) for the DMW-GFC1 announcement post.

This seems like an ideal solution for me, since it is an attachment for my Lumix 14mm f2.5 lens, and adds only the size of a single filter to my camera bag. I was hoping that it would also be economical. Preorder information from Adorama indicates that it will be priced at $149, pretty darned steep for a single filter.

Then there is the Samyang/Rokinon option. As far as I can tell, Samyang and Rokinon are different labels for the same lenses. They make a 7.5mm f3.5 fisheye, which is currently available on Amazon for $286.19. This lens also gets good reviews optically. It is a "native" Micro 4/3 mount, which means no adapter is needed to mount it to your Lumix or other Micro 4/3 camera. However, it does not have any electrical connection to the camera body, which is why I put "native" in quotes. This means that while you can use the camera's exposure meter in Manual or Aperture Priority modes, any mode that requires electronic control of the aperture (Shutter Priority, Program) does not work.

Since I am optimizing for cost, image quality, and size, this presents a challenge to me. In terms of cost, the Samyang wins, really because I believe $150 is too much for the Panasonic DMW-GFC1 attachment. I am sure the Lumix 8mm wins the image quality contest, but it seems the Samyang is very close, according to what I've seen in reviews. Size, of course, goes to the filter attachment. That said, neither the Panasonic or Samyang lens is very big.

Honestly, though, I don't think either the Panasonic or Samyang full lens would make it into my bag often. The DMW-GFC1 filter will stay there, all the time. That probably makes it the best option for me. The DMW-GFC1 was announced in early January, and is still not available for purchase in the USA (as of March 12). Maybe I can pick one up when I'm in Japan in a few weeks.

 

(Click Here) for a nice report and summary of reviews on the Samyang lens. If size were not a major consideration for me, I would probably buy one of these.

 

DMC-365.blogspot.com

 

Want the Rokinon lens? Panasonic? Please click below to buy yours, and support this blog!

 

 

 

 

 

Dave Martinez's Tips on Choosing Photo Equipment for Travel

Dave Martinez posted a nice blog entry about how to choose the appropriate equipment for travel

 

(Click Here) to read Dave's entry.

 

Dave lists a few different combinations that he takes on travel. Like me, he usually opts for a Micro 4/3 kit these days, unless the trip demands full-frame equipment, when he, again like me, chooses Nikon.

 

I agree with most of the points that Dave makes, including limiting yourself to a few lenses, and not worrying about covering every focal length. You'll be surprised at how you adapt, sometimes in very creative ways, to not having a super zoom and several other lenses.

 

Dave sometimes goes without any lens covering the "normal" (~40-50mm full-frame 35mm equivalent); that's where our approaches differ. I cannot imagine going on a trip without at least one normal lens, usually a fast one. My favorite right now is the Pana-Leica Summilux 25mm f1.4, but the Lumix 20mm f1.7 is a great, more compact option.

 

I am planning for a trip to Japan in about a month. I'm thinking I will take two DMC-G3s, Lumix 14mm f2.5, Lumix 20mm f1.7 (or Summilux), and Pana-Leica 45mm f2.8 Macro-Elmarit. That will be a very powerful, yet light and compact kit.

 

When I'm going for the ultimate in compact, and will be shooting in mostly good light (not having to worry too much about small sensor noise), I will use the DMC-LX5, as shown above. The LX5 offers a very nice zoom range, wide enough aperture to get shallow depth of field, and excellent image quality, in my opinion. It also have very nice settings for street photography, HDR, etc. See my post from January for more details.

 

DMC-365.blogspot.com

 

 

 

 

Another Insightful Post from Kirk Tuck, The Visual Science Lab

 

Image Source: http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2012/02/spirited-nonsense-and-neutral-reality.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheVisualScienceLab+%28The+Visual+Science+Lab%29

 

Kirk Tuck shared a very interesting post about how our choices in equipment are so much better than ever before.

 

(Click Here) to see the original post at the Visual Science Lab site.

 

I very much like and agree with Kirk's opinion that none of the excellent camera formats available to us makes any of the others obsolete. As he states, everything from medium or large format film, down to Micro 4/3 (and smaller) is useful in its own right. I very much like his thought that the small size of Micro 4/3 gear may open new market opportunities for those in applications that benefit from it.

 

I find that I still rely on my full-frame Nikon equipment for certain applications (wireless flash, the lowest noise at high iso, super-fast action), but am quite pleased to leave it at home when my Micro 4/3 kit (usually two DMC-G3s) will suffice. And, I find that it suffices most of the time.

 

I appreciate Kirk's approach of celebrating the opportunities these new formats give us, without trashing the more established formats and what they do for us.

 

DMC-365.blogspot.com

 

Support my blog by ordering from Amazon through this link: