[wim]

Hi Frank,

[quote name='Frank' timestamp='1338645571' post='18621']

Thank you for sharing your experience, Wim. It is very interesting and helpful.



Please allow me have a few questions about your GF2. (I am new to MTF and know almost nothing about how good a compact MFT camera is.)



1. Do you shoot in RAW or jpeg with your GF2? As I read the review at dpreview, I notice that noise starts to be seen at iso 400 in raw images. The jpeg images are cleanear due to the default noise reduction in camera. Then, if you shoot in raw, do you often need to do noise reduction in post processing?[/quote]

I shoot both RAW and jpeg simultaneously, as I do with any other digital camera. It allows me to hand out images quickly, and at the same time makes it possible to do any postprocessing if and when I need it and have the opportunity to do so.



Up to 800 iso I so far didn;t see th eneed to do noise reduction. As long as one exposes properly, there isn't really the need. Most of the time not even at 1600 iso IMO. Compared to the G10 this little camera is squeaky clean noisewise. Ok, the 5D II is cleaner, but that is to be expected.

2. How is the high iso performance of GF2? Are you satisfied with it?

Yes. I shot in near dark high contrast situations (just a light illuminating the scene, and it does well there, no problem.



I also find I can get away with slower shutter speeds than one would expect from a dslr, essentially because the camera is light and there is no mirror slap. Therefore, 800 and 1600 iso are not as limited as it may seem at first.

3. Have you ever used an external EVF on GF2? How do you feel about it? Do you feel uncomfortable when you do focusing and framing with the LCD screen?

I haven't used the external EVF on the GF2, except fro a little test ride, although I could get that cheaply too; I feel its resolution isn't high enough, and the LCD screen works very well indeed. What is really neat is the possibility to point at something (tip your finger on the LCD screen on the subject of choice) and have the camera focus at that point. That is really a marvelous feature. In short, frame first, tip screen with index finger on the spot to focus on, hold steady again and shoot. No focus peaking, but I can live without it thanks to this feature, for now anyway <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />.



I would rather consider an optical external VF than the EVF, BTW. Maybe that will be different with GX1 or OM DM-5, which both have much higher resolution and better quality EVFs.

I used to consider GF2 (and the E-P E-PL series on the Olympus side) because of its compactness. I also like the looking of it (but not GF3-which is too "roundish" in shape). Now I lean to the GX1 because of its slightly advanced sensor with better high iso performance and the GX1 is also compact (although not that compact as GF2). But of course GX1 is more pricy.



After reading your post now I think I shoud focus on MTF series. The APS-C mirrorless system can have compact cameras (e.g. Sony NEX series) but lenses are not compact--with perhaps only one exception: Fuji X-pro 1 (but then the camera body is not that compact although still smaller than a dslr).



Best regards,

Frank

I don't particularly like the look of the GF3 (or GF5) either, I prefer the more rectangular shape of the GF2 and GX1, for sure <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />. The round shape of the GF3 makes it look more like a design camera than a real tool, IMO anyway <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />. However, that really is in the eye of the beholder. The GX1 is more pricey, but I do think it is a better camera. However, for me personally the GF2 will do fine for now, especially as a replacement for the Canon G10, and even more so at the price I paid for it ( < 100 euros <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />, a bit over 200 with 14-45).



The Fuji X-Pro 1 is way too expensive IMO, how good it may be, and still not really compact either. Furthermore, it is very hard to come by, and the native lens range is quite small too, apart from potential pitfalls with (U)WA lenses for this camera. MFT doesn't seem to have a problem here; the Panny 7-14 and Olympus 9-18 are truly excellent as far as I can see.



Personally I don't indeed see the real benefit of an APS-C compact system camera right now - the difference in price and size with the smaller dslrs is IMO rather small. And I would have the advantage to use all of my current lenses. However, that again doesn't solve the compactness and weight problem either when I can't carry a lot, as my dslr lenses are all FF lenses. My small carry-all (man purse if you like, A5 size with two main pockets) holds my identity documents, wallet, pens, a few odds and ends, the GF2 with 20 F/1.7 mounted, plus a lens of choice between 7-14, 14-45, or 45, and if really pressed even two of those. And that in the same space where I put my G10 in the past. Works for me.... <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />.



Kind regards, Wim