Fast wide angle lens to use with GH1

Thanks Joe1946 - that dof calculator is AWESOME! I will use this always.

Here we go then for GH1 and kit lens:

Panasonic Lumix GH1
Focal Length 14mm
Aperture f4
Subject 10'

Total dof: 135ft

But if you spend $400 on a 14mm f2.5 prime, you bring that total maximum dof down to.........17.8ft, which is still DEEEEEEEEP, but now also soft.

It's your money but, I'd buy the 7-14mm f4 (or take the kit lens on a flight to Italy) and use 14mm at f8 hyperfocal.
 
Last edited:
Been thinking of the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8, but are there any drawbacks? Is the lens too heavy for the mount on a GH1 - especially after adding an adapter?
 
Drawbacks? Yes. It's AF, but won't be linked to the camera, so MF, but no way to focus properly as it's focus by wire. Also, I have read that the Panasonic 4/3 lenses correct for chromatic abheration and barrel distortion using the firmware (ie the camera knows the lens characteristics and compensates digitally.) 7-14mm f4, seriously.
 
Another super wide option is the Olympus 9-18mm f4-5.6 in the native Micro 4/3 mount. On the GH1/GF1 it works in both AFS and AFC autofocus modes and tracks focus so quietly you can barely tell when it adjusts itself. It's a superb lens at about half the price of the Lumix 7-14mm.
 
Lucas Adamson said:
Drawbacks? Yes. It's AF, but won't be linked to the camera, so MF, but no way to focus properly as it's focus by wire. Also, I have read that the Panasonic 4/3 lenses correct for chromatic abheration and barrel distortion using the firmware (ie the camera knows the lens characteristics and compensates digitally.) 7-14mm f4, seriously.
Click to expand...

Thanks Lucas for your input. The 7-14mm f4 seems like a great lens, but I'm wishing for something faster for low-light places like inside clubs.

I was wondering if the Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 would lose a stop or less of light when used with an adapter. Anyone have any idea?
 
goodgoings said:
Thanks Lucas for your input. The 7-14mm f4 seems like a great lens, but I'm wishing for something faster for low-light places like inside clubs.

I was wondering if the Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 would lose a stop or less of light when used with an adapter. Anyone have any idea?
Click to expand...

Adaptors on the GH1 don't use any optics so there's no light loss.
 
On M4/3 the sensor is very near the front of the camera. On an SLR, the sensor or film plane is deeper, behind a diagonal mirror.

The adapter depth just makes the sensor the right distance from the rear element of the lens. It makes up for the mirror box space. That's all.
 
Mike@AF said:
In cinema they don't go wider than 18 very often, so 20 is still wide, as is 25.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I'm a bit of a n00b. A 20 mm on a 4/3 is 40mm isn't it? So you're saying that in cinema they don't often go wider than the equivalent of 36mm in a FF camera? How do they shoot wide shots indoors?
 
On Big interior places, like the palace of versailles or a SOUNDSTAGE :)
In cinema they tend to have a lot of money...

I believe the wider I'm used to go is 18mm, but the 24mm already feels pretty strange (The 24mm is Terry Gilliam's favourite lens). I wouldn't say 36mm, I'd say, the wider we are used to seeing is closer to a 28mm on a full frame camera.
 
Soldier said:
Sorry, I'm a bit of a n00b. A 20 mm on a 4/3 is 40mm isn't it? So you're saying that in cinema they don't often go wider than the equivalent of 36mm in a FF camera? How do they shoot wide shots indoors?
Click to expand...

No. You don't change the focal length. It's strictly field of view that changes, not the focal length. a 20mm lens is always a 20mm lens. The field of view will be different on different cameras with different sensors.
 
taubkin said:
In cinema they tend to have a lot of money...

I believe the wider I'm used to go is 18mm, but the 24mm already feels pretty strange (The 24mm is Terry Gilliam's favourite lens). I wouldn't say 36mm, I'd say, the wider we are used to seeing is closer to a 28mm on a full frame camera.
Click to expand...

William A. Fraker shot Polanski's brilliant "Rosemary's Baby" on a 24mm and an 18mm lens only, for the whole film. That's on a 35mm movie camera.

The equivalent in m4/3 is about 20mm and 15mm.

The equivalent angle on a full frame 35mm stills camera is 50mm and 35mm lenses.

If 24mm is Gilliam's favourite lens, it is because it is the standard view, just like a 50mm planar design lens on a 35mm stills camera is standard. Not only that, but the Planar design employed in most 50mm stills lenses is fast, sharp as a tack and generally regarded as the best overall prime lens design for medium focal lengths, despite being prone to flare and lower contrast than the sonnar, because it has the least aberrations of any design.
 
Last edited:
Soldier said:
Sorry, I'm a bit of a n00b. A 20 mm on a 4/3 is 40mm isn't it? So you're saying that in cinema they don't often go wider than the equivalent of 36mm in a FF camera? How do they shoot wide shots indoors?
Click to expand...

Most films are not shot with full frame cameras.

The FOV of 20mm on M43 is like the FOV of 28mm in S35.
 
Apefos Adapter said:
The tip is to put a UV filter between the camera lens and the Raynox, this will increase a little the distance between the Raynox and the camera lens to improve the image quality.
Click to expand...

Very interesting, can anyone try it?

One thing to be aware of is that these adapters may put undue strain on the auto-focus motors of lenses that physically more their fronts during focusing, eg. the 20mm pancake. Someone was advised by Panny that their 20mm should really not have more than two ordinary filters attached. I don't know how reliable that info is but it makes sense to me, something heavy will tax the motor more and doesn't seem a good idea.
 
g.l said:
Very interesting, can anyone try it?
Click to expand...

I did a try using the Raynox 6600 wide angle adapter in front of the Sigma 20mm 1.8 lens. I used a 82-52mm step down ring and also a UV filter between the sigma and the raynox.

The UV filter acts as a spacer ring and when it increase the distance between the raynos and the sigma the corner/edges get very better eliminating the blur/soft.

If i remove the UV filter I get bad edges, but with it the sharp image is corner to corner.

the sigma 20mm 1.8 becames a 40mm in the gh2 and with the raynox 6600 attatched it becames a fast 27mm f1.8

the raynox will be great to use with the 20mm 1.7 panckake kens.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top