GH1 + 14-140 vs Sony FX1 or Canon A1 in low light?
- Thread starter GetUp
- Start date
commanderspike
Carbonite Member
In very general terms...
The 14-140mm lens is quite a slow lens (at F4) so you are better off buying a different lens for shooting in low light with the GH1.
With the 14-140m, the GH1 would be about level with the FX1 for low light brightness, maybe a bit less noise and maybe not quite as bright - but it puts up a good fight.
However with a fast Canon, Nikon, Zeiss or Leica lens via an adapter the camera is better than both the FX1 and A1 in low light.
You need an F1.4 or F1.8 lens to get the best out of it. The widest you can go (with full frame coverage) at F1.4 is a 25mm Leica and the widest at F1.8 is a 20mm Sigma.
There is also a Leica F2.8 14mm-50mm zoom lens, which is very nice. The cheapest option is a 50mm Canon F1.4 - also quite nice especially for the money (£50).
Gain on the GH1 is not measured in db, but with ISO. It goes up to ISO 1600, whereas a video camera is usually around 320-640. The image is relatively noise free up to ISO 800. You can get away with ISO 1600 but not so much on dimly lit surfaces, skies and skin tones due to the CMOS fixed pattern noise that the GH1 has.
The 14-140mm lens is quite a slow lens (at F4) so you are better off buying a different lens for shooting in low light with the GH1.
With the 14-140m, the GH1 would be about level with the FX1 for low light brightness, maybe a bit less noise and maybe not quite as bright - but it puts up a good fight.
However with a fast Canon, Nikon, Zeiss or Leica lens via an adapter the camera is better than both the FX1 and A1 in low light.
You need an F1.4 or F1.8 lens to get the best out of it. The widest you can go (with full frame coverage) at F1.4 is a 25mm Leica and the widest at F1.8 is a 20mm Sigma.
There is also a Leica F2.8 14mm-50mm zoom lens, which is very nice. The cheapest option is a 50mm Canon F1.4 - also quite nice especially for the money (£50).
Gain on the GH1 is not measured in db, but with ISO. It goes up to ISO 1600, whereas a video camera is usually around 320-640. The image is relatively noise free up to ISO 800. You can get away with ISO 1600 but not so much on dimly lit surfaces, skies and skin tones due to the CMOS fixed pattern noise that the GH1 has.
commanderspike
Carbonite Member
Finding decent c-mount lenses turned out to be a lot harder than I expected. I have one due shortly, a 16mm F2 Xenon but that won't cover the whole frame. You need to find at least a 25mm for that.
Yes you can get stunning results with c-mount lenses, but they remain more a curiosity / artistic thing for me. They're damned rare and the prices are going up and up for the good ones... the Contax Zeiss and Canon FD 35mm lenses are the best choice if you want improved low light performance on the GH1 without spending silly money.
Yes you can get stunning results with c-mount lenses, but they remain more a curiosity / artistic thing for me. They're damned rare and the prices are going up and up for the good ones... the Contax Zeiss and Canon FD 35mm lenses are the best choice if you want improved low light performance on the GH1 without spending silly money.
Chibs
Active member
Zeiss lenses are still pretty expensive, especially compared to c-mount lenses. When m4/3 became available, the prices of c-mount lenses really went up in price quite a bit! I'm happy I already had a selection for super8/16mm cameras, as it's getting pretty hard to get a hold of the real gems.
FD lenses are still rather cheap, because besides the 4/3rd cameras now, they cannot easily be adapted to digital. FD lenses aren't always known for their quality, however.
Zeiss lenses are of great optical quality, however, you don't really need all this quality. Due to the crop sensor, it only uses the sweet spot center of the lens. I love my Planars, but I love them because there's so little vignetting on a 35mm Contax camera. With the GH1, this problem is almost nonexistent with a lot of lenses.
If you want lowlight abilities really cheap, buy a M42 adapter. A well performing 50mm f1.8 won't cost you more then a few bucks, and the adapter is one of the cheapest as well, due to it's simplicity.
FD lenses are still rather cheap, because besides the 4/3rd cameras now, they cannot easily be adapted to digital. FD lenses aren't always known for their quality, however.
Zeiss lenses are of great optical quality, however, you don't really need all this quality. Due to the crop sensor, it only uses the sweet spot center of the lens. I love my Planars, but I love them because there's so little vignetting on a 35mm Contax camera. With the GH1, this problem is almost nonexistent with a lot of lenses.
If you want lowlight abilities really cheap, buy a M42 adapter. A well performing 50mm f1.8 won't cost you more then a few bucks, and the adapter is one of the cheapest as well, due to it's simplicity.