Comments on: Mirrorless Cameras Continue to Change the Photographic Landscape

By: danieljcox

danieljcox — Sat, 03 Mar 2012 05:47:15 +0000

Jim,

Yes, exporting and working on that versus a JPEG would be a better idea if you really need to do major changes or adjustments.

By: jim heywood

jim heywood — Fri, 02 Mar 2012 12:14:53 +0000

Is there any advantage to using a TIFF file to edit vs a JPEG? I think the Silkypix will export a tiff.

By: danieljcox

danieljcox — Thu, 01 Mar 2012 16:53:23 +0000

Here’s what I’ve been doing until Apple gets Aperture up to speed with GX1 RAW. When shooting the GX1 I shoot in both RAW and JPEG. In Aperture I set the JPEG as Master. You do that by opening Aperture>Photos tab at top of screen, drop down gives you an option towards the bottom “Set JPEG as Master”. This gives you the ability to see all the images from the GX1. Downside to this option is no ability to work with the RAW, in Aperture, until we get the Aperture update. You could take the RAW into the Silkypix Software that Panasonic provides but you will see it is less than ideal. This issue is my biggest complaint against Aperture, otherwise I love it. Thanks for the question and help me spread the word.

By: jim heywood

jim heywood — Thu, 01 Mar 2012 14:35:40 +0000

So I finally figured out how to get back to you. My question about this camera and the system in general is about the RAW file it produces. Is there any conversion that will allow RAW or its equivalent to be imported into Aperture.

By: Michael Furtman

Michael Furtman — Sun, 12 Feb 2012 20:14:22 +0000

Like I said, you may well be right! So who’s going to buy all my uses SLR equipment?

By: danieljcox

danieljcox — Sun, 12 Feb 2012 19:25:47 +0000

Mike, I bet in five years none of us will be shooting cameras with mirrors in them. Lenses may be the same but even that would be a huge step in the right direction. If you saw the quality of these Micro 4/3's cameras you would be inspired too. Sony is already heading in this direction with the amazing A77 As far as your Canon combination is concerned, 1 stop is a huge factor in size and weight. To shrug it off as "though a stop slower" is not taking into consideration the size and weight factor one stop adds. Not to mention, that the Olympus lenses are several years old and you're comparing the newest Canon optics which are using current day state of the art materials that are lighter weight. Give Olympus and Panasonic another year and encouragement through sales of these systems and they most certainly will be matching materials Canon is using. Panasonic is a HUGE company and make no mistake about it they're making inroads faster than anyone would have imagined. It's great for those of us who have carried too much weight around for far too long. I can't wait for Nikon and Canon to join this movement. Just my two cents.

By: Michael Furtman

Michael Furtman — Sun, 12 Feb 2012 19:06:49 +0000

I can tell you’re really hyped on this stuff, Dan! Time will tell if you’re right. But I will point out that my Canon 300 f/2.8 weighs a pound and half less than the Olympus 300 (and the new version, more than two pounds less). On my 7D’s APSc sensor, that’s a 420mm equivalent, and with the 1.4x extender, a 588mm equivalent, and still far lighter (though a stop slower than the Olympus). Guess I’m just a doubting Thomas!

By: danieljcox

danieljcox — Sun, 12 Feb 2012 13:14:19 +0000

Mike, The lenses are on their way. Panasonic recently just announced the Micro 4/3's equivalent of the 24-70mm and the 70-200mm lenses. Unconfirmed is the rumor that they will be at least F/2.8 and very possibly F/2.0. Both are half the size of Canon and Nikon equivalents. I recently purchased the Panasonic 7-14mm F/4 which is 14-24mm full frame equivalent. It's not an F/2.8 but it is a superb lens. It looks like a mini Nikon 14-24F/2.8 at about one third the weight. Admittedly, Nikon's is a bit sharper and virtually without equal in zooms and many say even fixed focal length versions but Panasonic and Olympus are just getting started. Olympus has a beautiful 24mm F/2.0 that is being heralded as superb. If you do further research, Olympus makes several profession lenses but are much smaller and lighter than Canon and Nikon equivalents. Take for example the Zuiko 90-250mm F/2.8 (that's 180-500 equivalent) It's one stop faster than Nikon's amazing 200-400mm F/4 and about the same weight, but a full stop brighter. Another example is Olympus' 300mm F/2.8 (600mm equivalent). It weighs in at just a bit more than half of the Nikon 600mm F/4 and once again one full stop brighter. I hope the links I've provided above work properly. I can't see them in my responses. Thanks for staying in touch Mike. Hope all is well.

By: Michael Furtman

Michael Furtman — Sun, 12 Feb 2012 12:16:35 +0000

Dan, very interesting article. Do you think that the camera makers will invest in producing truly professional quality lenses for these mirror less cameras? That seems to be the one factor you left out of your explanation why we carry those big lenses. There are lighter smaller 500 mm lenses out there. But they don’t have the needed image quality. I wonder if we’ll see pro lenses in this new format?

By: danieljcox

danieljcox — Sat, 11 Feb 2012 14:19:42 +0000

Tom, we’ll see the big lenses come down in size for the for the lighter cameras. It’s all coming fast.

By: Tom Grey

Tom Grey — Sat, 11 Feb 2012 12:55:48 +0000

I’m one of those people in photography for the fun, though as a retired guy I’m doing it full time. But my targets are birds, and so I’m condemned to sore shoulders (and, at age 70, knees, feet…) as the cost of my kind of fun. To me, light weight means the forthcoming Canon 600 lens, which will weigh a mere 9 lbs or so, the same as the current 500. Compared to the glass burden, the weight difference between my 1D Mark 4 and a micro 4/3 camera is small change. Not that I wouldn’t love a shoulder-saving miracle, but physics (optics) and biology (the shyness of wild birds) seem to stand in the way.

By: danieljcox

danieljcox — Fri, 10 Feb 2012 14:01:45 +0000

Doug, you lucky bum. Hope the skinning is better in Utah than it is here in Montana. I couldn’t have said it better regarding the GX1 and the fact that it is with you and ready for great image capture. Have fun and look forward to seeing you two soon.

By: Doug Bray

Doug Bray — Fri, 10 Feb 2012 10:55:12 +0000

Hi Dan,

I think you are right about the value of these cameras. We are in Snowbird Utah this week and I am skiing with the Lumix GX-1 in my parka pocket. I would never ski with a DSLR. The Lumix has most of the advanced features of my D300S and D700 without the size and weight. It allows me to get great pictures with would otherwise not be taken.

Debra and I look forward to seeing you and Tanya in India.

Doug

By: danieljcox

danieljcox — Thu, 09 Feb 2012 22:18:46 +0000

Fred, you won’t be disappointed in any of the gear you recently purchased. I’m loving the GX1, the Nikon Macro lighting system is the best being made and the Eddie Bauer duffel is the greatest value for price and features I’ve ever found. It was great having you and Kathy in Costa Rica with us. Be all and keep up the great photography. You’re doing great work.

By: Fred Kurtz

Fred Kurtz — Thu, 09 Feb 2012 21:03:12 +0000

Dan,

One day after arriving home from the wonderful Costa Rica trip, I purchased the Panasonic GX1 mirrorless camera with the X 14-42 lens from F11 in Bozeman (very nice people by the way). So I now have joined the mirroless band wagon. In addition I also ordered the Nikon R1 macro flash system from F11….and from Eddie Baurer, the large duffle bag. So hopefully this completes the “Dan Recommended Purchase List” that I get from every trip with you. For those who have never been to Costa Rica, please join Dan and Tanya in 2014. You will not be dissappointed.