GH4 - yet more lens questions......coming from Canon, what to do next...

James Carpenter

James Carpenter

Well-known member
I currently own a GH4 and the Olympus 17mm 1.8 and find it very nice.

I'm a little torn as to what to do next; coming from a Canon background I already own a 50mm 1.2 and 100mm 2.8.
Would you get the metabones EF/MFT speedbooster so that I can utilise these lenses....? Now if I understand correctly the crop factor on these two lenses would be 100mm and 200mm (or there-abouts) when used on the GH4.

or.

start investing in MFT lenses, specifically some kind of zoom?

Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated.
 
One of the big advantages of m4/3 (if you're not a young weightlifter) is the compactness and lighter weight of the equipment. You've already had a "taste" of that with the 17mm f1.8 you have. If you decide to start acquiring MFT lenses what you will be photographing (or shooting motion picture on) will kind of guide you on what you need.

My first acquisitions were all primes: The Lumix 14mm f2.5, the Lumix 20mm f1.7 (your 17mm kind of covers the midground between those two), and the Olympus 45mm f1.8. If you do portraits you might look at that last one. It's incredibly small (tiny almost), amazingly sharp even wide open and delivers nice contrast and punch.

For zooms you might look at the Lumix 12-35mm f2.8 for starters, it's a bit pricey but very well thought of. Budget was a big consideration for me so I went for the Lumix 14-45mm f3.5-5.6 (the original "kit" lens - metal barrel with pretty good optics - you have to find them used now), and the Lumix 45-200mm f4-5.6.

On the Olympus side I went for the 9-18mm f4-5.6 giving me decent wide coverage and the 40-150mm f4-5.6, an incredibly compact, light, fun and easy to use telephoto zoom.

Those were some of the choices I made and my back muscles thank me (just turned 76).
 
It depends: If you intend to use a follow focus it's better to adapt the lens. If you want the smallest possible setup and willing to futz around with the AF system the native lenses are the way to go.

Just remember native lenses means you will be investing into the m4/3 systems, so be sure you're willing to stick with it for at least a while.
 
Yes, when shooting full resolution 4:3 aspect still photos on the GH4, there is a 2X crop factor relative to a 3:2 aspect "full" 35mm photography frame. So if your 'frame of reference' (pardon the pun) is in fact a 36mm X 24mm photography frame, then you're good to go, and yes, your lenses will now look like a 100mm f2.4 and 200mm f5.6 respectively. (Incidentally, the 2X CF also applies to your Oly lens in that it looks like a 35mm f3.5 would on a Canon 5D, for example.)

But if your frame of reference is something else (e.g. 35mm motion picture film) and/or you shoot anything other than 4:3 aspect still photos on the GH4, the crop factor will likely be something other than exactly 2X. Often somewhere between 1.5X and 2.5X, if that matters to you.

Crop Factor will also change when you add a Speedbooster which has a fractional 0.71X CF. e.g. when using your 50mm lens to shoot 4:3 stills on the GH4 with a Speedbooster: 50mm X 2 X 0.71 = 71mm relative to a 3:2 35mm photography frame.

For me personally, I would find the jump from 17mm to 50mm and then to 100mm too large, so I would prefer to have some other options. YMMV.

One less expensive option you might consider trying first is a non-Speedbooster adapter. Basically, a spacer tube that places an EF lens at the proper distance from the sensor to allow infinity focus. You also won't be able to set the lens' aperture with the GH4 (you'd have to mount the lens on a Canon camera, then set the aperture and remove the lens while holding the Depth of Field Preview button), but these types of adapters usually only cost $20 or so.

HTH - Mark
 
I have the EF to M4/3 SpeedBooster, and would recommend it since you already have a couple of nice EF mount lenses. Using the SpeedBooster puts you back in the S35 realm.
 
Thanks all, very helpful and has started me thinking a lot more about this.

I have a Canon 50D that I predominantly use for stills, but am starting to think the GH4 could act as a replacement. If that is the case then I would most likely stick with native 4/3 lenses and sell off all the canon stuff.

Would you consider the GH4 to be a good replacement for a 50D image quality wise?
 
James Carpenter said:
Would you consider the GH4 to be a good replacement for a 50D image quality wise?
Click to expand...

Assuming equivalent glass, yes. But "equivalent glass" could be a bit tricky. First, although the 42.5mm f1.2 Nocticron is pretty close to Canon's 50mm f1.2 L, be sure to check the price so you don't have sticker shock. And second, I can't really think of an equivalent m4/3 macro lens to Canon's 100mm f2.8; closest would probably be Oly's 60mm f2.8. Or if you don't need macro, Oly's 75mm f1.8 or Pany's 35-100mm f2.8, but be sure to check the price on these, too.
 
The GH4's sensor simply outclasses the outdated sensor in the 50D. What you might miss is the phase detection autofocus: Tracking AF is not the strong point of many mirrorless cameras.
 
James Carpenter said:
Thanks all, very helpful and has started me thinking a lot more about this.

I have a Canon 50D that I predominantly use for stills, but am starting to think the GH4 could act as a replacement. If that is the case then I would most likely stick with native 4/3 lenses and sell off all the canon stuff.

Would you consider the GH4 to be a good replacement for a 50D image quality wise?
Click to expand...

the olympus 45mm 1.8 is great and i hear the 75mm 1.8 just went down a lot in price so those are my 2 favorite lenses for talking heads and photography... but if you do both photography and video, id keep the 50d for photography and the metabones and use your canon lenses and the gh4 for video.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top