Comments on: Crazy Comparison Day #3, the Panasonic GH1, Olympus E-P2 & Leica M9

By: ulfie

ulfie — Fri, 30 Dec 2011 01:33:49 +0000

Your wife’s two outdoor B&W portraits differ a bit. The Leica’s seems a big darker with more detail in her hair while the Panny’s seems a bit oversexposed and thus loses some hair detail though what’s there is still pretty good. Perhaps less exposure in the Panny’s would bring out more hair detail though this is nit-picking. As you say, for the money, the Panny does a helluva job. The Leica’s has a small edge but so it should at that price. For me as a non-pro and non-rich Joe Photog the Panny is just fine. I plan on getting it soon, graduating so to speak from the Panny LX3 which is also good for the $$$.

By: Jonny

Jonny — Fri, 21 Jan 2011 15:56:52 +0000

Great Photos the M9 is awesome

How close would IQ be with the 5D Mk2 with a 50mm F1.4 compared with the M9

By: Guy

Guy — Wed, 05 May 2010 13:22:06 +0000

The difference between the two is almost nothing. It’s all RGB data and can be easily adjusted in PP.
An easy way to start is use ‘camera calibration’ in Camera Raw (also with a jpeg).
The two sensors see color different, that’s all there is to it. Adjusting color and contrast the right way will give you two almost identical images.
Both files can be sharpened nicely to get good output.
The only real difference between most camera’s these days is the way they chance your bank account.

By: Struggling to fall in love with the M9 - Seite 6 - Leica User Forum

Struggling to fall in love with the M9 - Seite 6 - Leica User Forum — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 00:26:37 +0000

[...] about many technical differencies, etc. But it is not the point. If want have a look on samples: Crazy Comparison Day #3, the Panasonic GH1, Olympus E-P2 & Leica M9 | STEVE HUFF PHOTOS or Testing Lens Bokeh on Full Frame and Micro 4/3 cameras | STEVE HUFF PHOTOS I can send you [...]

By: David Wogan

David Wogan — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 19:37:14 +0000

I think that what makes this topic interesting, is that it is happening at all. Who could have considered even a few years ago that images from a full-frame Leica could be compared with those from a M43 camera?

Of course the M9 produces better images – what a shock it would be if did not. So no surprise there then. The question the user has to ask is: is it better in direct proportion to it’s price? My view would be – clearly not.

The images from my full-frame Canon 1Ds are also better than those from my E-P2, but the margin is very, very small. Small enough for me to consider using the E-P2 is situations where previously I would only have considered the full-frame SLR.

Now that really is progress.

By: Lachlan

Lachlan — Sat, 13 Feb 2010 04:07:12 +0000

Sorry to add a non-gear oriented comment (I am researching the GF1/EP2), but that playground scene, with the snow and the lighting look right out of the movie Let the Right One In.

By: Hans

Hans — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 22:56:42 +0000

Steve, the 20mm inherently has pale colors. Comparison is fine since that’s a m4/3 system against the Leica one.

But color will certainly improve with the Summicron on the E-P2, or the Olympus 177mm m4/3 camera (actually almost all m4/3 lenses will have more vivid color than the 20mm, IMHO.

By: Jerry_R

Jerry_R — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 20:00:14 +0000

Curt S.,
there is defintely sth in what you Curt are writing. Pls have a look at below thread, where people admit that great and big (in terms of space) bokeh looks nice… On monitor… Not always on big prints:

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m9-forum/114721-bad-bokeh-good-bokeh.html

By: Curt S.

Curt S. — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 19:32:27 +0000

I will repeat the heresy in that I agree with Frank M. For me, when an image has a large background/subject ratio, drastically OOF backgrounds distract me from the subject. In a scene like that, I’d rather have the more gentle out-of focus effect of the E-P2.

By: Steve Huff

Steve Huff — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 14:44:12 +0000

Yes, if you want to achieve the same look with the full frame as the m4/3 you would do that but who would want to match the look of the m4/3 on a ff? I see it the other way around as how to get the ff look on m4/3. To do so is prety much impossible, and is one weakness of the smaller sensor cameras like the m4/3 cameras.

Doesn’t mean I do not love the E-P2, it just means that shallow DOF is not a strong point of m4/3. Never has been.

The other way to look at this is:

I stand in one place with a ff and m4/3 camera
I frame my subject
I have a 50 F2 on the ff M9
I would need a 25mm F1 to get the same look of the M9 in regards to DOF because the 20 1.7 will still give me 20mm DOF even though it is acting like a 40mm in focal length.

Thanks!