Am I missing something, or is the GF1 14-45 useless?

I just switched from a Canon Rebel XT with 18-55 kit lens/50mm 1.8 prime to a GF1 14-45 kit and 20mm pancake.

I've been playing around with both the lenses (in low to medium light) and I can't get a good shot out of the 14-45. OIS doesn't compensate as well as I'd hoped. My expectations for the 20mm were exceeded in all regards (except AF during video... MF is a must), so I'm wondering if I'm just doing something wrong with the zoom.

Is it just not meant for indoor shots w/o flash? It feels really limiting to not be able to get one good shot out of 10 in lower light (at least in the intelligent auto and aperture priority stuff I've tried so far), but maybe the 20mm (and 50mm canon) have spoiled me for low-light photography.

Is there something I'm doing wrong? Do I need to crank up ISO sensitivity even in iA mode? Is that even possible?

I'm puzzled by this post. What ISOs and shutter speeds are you using? I've been able to shoot as low as 1/8 second at the long end with this lens and still get reasonable sharpness out of it, on my G1 using the EVF. On the GF1, if you don't have an EVF, I suppose this would be more difficult, but still, if you form a tripod with your elbows against your chest and both hands holding the camera, you should be able to shoot indoors reasonably well at higher ISOs.

tehviking said:

I just switched from a Canon Rebel XT with 18-55 kit lens/50mm 1.8 prime to a GF1 14-45 kit and 20mm pancake.

I've been playing around with both the lenses (in low to medium light) and I can't get a good shot out of the 14-45. OIS doesn't compensate as well as I'd hoped. My expectations for the 20mm were exceeded in all regards (except AF during video... MF is a must), so I'm wondering if I'm just doing something wrong with the zoom.

Is it just not meant for indoor shots w/o flash? It feels really limiting to not be able to get one good shot out of 10 in lower light (at least in the intelligent auto and aperture priority stuff I've tried so far), but maybe the 20mm (and 50mm canon) have spoiled me for low-light photography.

Click to expand...

The 20mm is 3-4 stops faster than the 14-45mm (f/1.7 vs. f/4-5.6). As an example, I just took my E-3 and measured what the meter thought the next room's light level at f/5.6, and it said for that room, I needed ISO 3200, f/5.6, and 1/50 shutter speed. I then put my Sigma 30mm f/1.4 lens on the camera, and I needed ISO 320, f/1.4, and 1/60 shutter speed. 4 stops of light is a big handicap when you need to shoot without flash.

If a lens is one stop faster than another, that means you can shoot the same scene at 1/2 the ISO or 1/2 the shutter speed. However, depth of field enters into it, if you are shooting at f/1.7 you have a lot less depth of field than if you are shooting at f/5.6. So a faster prime might allow you to get the shot, but only the main subject will be in focus (and maybe only part of the subject's face).

The only faster zoom that will autofocus on your GF1 is the Olympus 14-54mm mark 2 with the Panasonic MA1 or Olympus MMF-1 adapters. This lens is f/2.8-3.5, so it is roughly 1 stop faster than the 14-45mm. Thus in my example above, it could shoot at ISO 1600, f/4 at 1/50, or ISO 3200, f/4, 1/100, or if you shoot at the wide angle end, ISO 800 f/2.8 at 1/50, or ISO 3200 f/2.8, 1/200.

The EP-1/EP-2 would auto focus the 14-35mm f/2 lenses (but not happily since it isn't a contrast detect auto focus lens), but at $2k for the lens it is not a practical solution for most people, and the lens is rather big/heavy. The 35-100mm f/2 is even bigger and heavier, and I doubt it would be a good fit for m43.

Generally if you want to shoot low light, no flash with your GF1 with an autofocus lens, your 20mm is your only real option, and you need to zoom with your feet instead of the lens.

tehviking said:

Is there something I'm doing wrong? Do I need to crank up ISO sensitivity even in iA mode? Is that even possible?

Click to expand...

You are running into the limits of how much light the lenses let in.

Since you already have the Canon 50 1.8, why not get a Canon-to-m4/3 adapter (about $60-$70 on eBay). You will have to manually focus the lens, but you will have obtained a great low-light and portrait lens for cheap money, and opened yourself to using other easily obtained MF Canon lenses on the GF1.

I started to think the same thing when I first got the 14-45 and the 20 mm. I could get great sharp pictures with the 14-45 outdoors but it was hopless indoors. On the other hand the 20 mm was perfect indoors and just as good outdoors if not better.

The zoom range wasn't really enough to justify its lack of low light abilities.

Then I shot some video with it. It was really sharp and fairly easy to use and the zooming actually was useful.

I can't say that I ever take pictures with the 14-45 unless they are at 45 mm. That is the only time I use it over the 20 mm. I actually think the better choice for a zoom lens would have been the 45-200. That has some usable reach.

I still use the 14-45 for video a lot though. Remember, this camera was designed to be a good still and a great video camera. If video is not your thing then you might not find the 14-45 as useful as the 20 mm pancake.

--
GF1 & ZS3 Sample movies
http://www.youtube.com/user/mpgxsvcd#play/uploads

Not with a moving subject you won't.

I take pictures of my kids and they are always moving. Anything less than 1/80 sec is useless with them. At 1/80 the 14-45 is useless indoors. The 20 mm does just fine though.

phototransformations said:

I'm puzzled by this post. What ISOs and shutter speeds are you using? I've been able to shoot as low as 1/8 second at the long end with this lens and still get reasonable sharpness out of it, on my G1 using the EVF.

Click to expand...

--
GF1 & ZS3 Sample movies
http://www.youtube.com/user/mpgxsvcd#play/uploads

The low light is going to depend on your shutter speed. OIS can only compensate for so low of a shutter speed. If you are expecting it to allow you to hand hold at 1 second, or even 1/30 of a second that just isn't going to happen, you need a tripod or something to set it on.

As for video with the 20mm, keep in mind that Panasonic did a great job on the GF1 and GH1 as far as video goes. However, they only have one lens designed for still and video work in all aspects and that is the 14-140 that comes with the GH1, the rest are all still lenses that just so happen can be used for video but aren't design specifically for it.

Frankly in this department I think Panasonic plain sucks. They should have more lenses that are designed for video. Maybe not a Pancake (it would be larger because of the video portion), but still they should have more than 1.

In fact I will go so far as to say Panasonic and Olympus both shouldn't put out a lens that isn't design for video. That is at least half of the reason to go with these cameras.

Small is nice, but not at the expense of being able to use features that the cameras were designed around, that includes video.

If you want something that is pretty much still only then one of the small dSLR's from Olympus or Pentax would be a better choice. The MFT is for people that want stills and video. It isn't just about tiny.

So don't over expect for low-light, most cameras him limits and these are not just MFT limits dSLR's have them too. As for video with the 20mm from what I have read MF is the way to go. Focus the lens at a distance that is a far as you plan to shoot and then don't move it. This may help in the long run to make you a better videographer too.

Good luck,

Robert
--
Ketchup is just over loved tomatoes.

I had thought you were talking about sharpness, not subject movement blur. Of course you will be limited to non-moving subjects when shooting a slow lens in available light indoors unless you adjust your technique. That doesn't make it a useless lens, just a lens that you can't use to shoot moving subjects without dealing with movement blur. But I wouldn't give up on the lens for taking pictures of your kids. If you learn to pan, use a high ISO, have the camera track focus, and shoot bursts of images, you should still be able to get some interesting shots of your moving subjects.

Thanks for the tips; I don't see myself going 14-45 indoors much then.

I plan to use this for a LOT of video, and I love the idea of getting help from OIS in that regard. I'll see how this lens does with that before deciding to list it on eBay or anything.

I think in term of shooting in low light, the 14-45 is about as good as the Canon kit lens. The different here is the Canon bigger sensor offering better noise control and the heftier weight + OVF more stabilizing than the light GF1 kit.

But overall, I don't think the experience should be that much different comparing to the Canon kit if you pull your elbow tightly onto your body to stabilize and hold the GF1 with both hands. Try this technique (which is one of the essential skill for P&S cameras ) and see if it helps.

And I'm not sure about the 14-45mm in low light. But my slower 14-140mm lens + GH1 can certainly manage 1/30s, ISO1600 so I think it's possible, unless you take pictures of moving kids. They need at least 1/100s so you need a lens that is at least 1.5-2 stops faster.

tehviking said:

I just switched from a Canon Rebel XT with 18-55 kit lens/50mm 1.8 prime to a GF1 14-45 kit and 20mm pancake.

I've been playing around with both the lenses (in low to medium light) and I can't get a good shot out of the 14-45. OIS doesn't compensate as well as I'd hoped. My expectations for the 20mm were exceeded in all regards (except AF during video... MF is a must), so I'm wondering if I'm just doing something wrong with the zoom.

Is it just not meant for indoor shots w/o flash? It feels really limiting to not be able to get one good shot out of 10 in lower light (at least in the intelligent auto and aperture priority stuff I've tried so far), but maybe the 20mm (and 50mm canon) have spoiled me for low-light photography.

Is there something I'm doing wrong? Do I need to crank up ISO sensitivity even in iA mode? Is that even possible?

Click to expand...

--
=============================
My flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/testdasi/

tehviking said:

... I can't get a good shot out of the 14-45. OIS doesn't compensate as well as I'd hoped.

Click to expand...

1. What ISO speeds are you using?
2. What shutter speeds are you getting?

It is hard to give any useful answer to your question without that information.

tehviking said:

Is there something I'm doing wrong? Do I need to crank up ISO sensitivity even in iA mode? Is that even possible?

Click to expand...

I think you should forget iA most of the time, and especially in challenging situations.

Use P, A, S or M (especially A set to wide open, or S at the slowest shutter speed that works for you), double check that OIS is active on both camera and lens, and use ISO 800 or 1600. If you want to use Auto ISO, you'll have to set it to max out at 800 or 1600 -- it defaults to 400.

At ISO 1600, you have to be extra careful that your shots are properly exposed -- noise and possibly banding may become issues with underexposure.

Many would also suggest RAW for challenging situations, but you can also accomplish a lot with JPEG by spending a few minutes adjusting the parameters of your chosen film mode, especially NR.

Even with all that, there's no getting around f3.5+ being pretty slow for indoor work. But with reasonable lighting, it is quite possible to get some good shots.

Where do you get the idea that m4/3 cameras are meant for video? The G1, for instance, doesn't do video, and I don't miss it. I'm interested in the articulating LCD, lighter weight, smaller lenses, and EVF, as well as the abilitiy to easily use legacy lenses, not video. At some point I may start shooting video, but as a still camera it's kept me away from my D80 and bag of lenses since I got my G1.

This is exactly what I was looking for. I didn't realize that Auto mode topped out at ISO 400. It was really jacking up my ability to shoot.

And yes, the kit zoom is VERY similar to the Canon. And I find the 20mm VERY similar to the 50. And similarly, I find myself gravitating to the prime for 90-95% of my shots.

I wanted to get the pulse of other owners to find out if that other 5-10% makes it worth keeping the lens around, or if perhaps I am simply not using the lens properly. Using Aperture Priority and ISO 800-1600 sounds like a start.

For what it's worth, I'm impressed that ISO 800-1600 is even an option. I know that full-size DSLRs make the GF1 look weak in this regard, but compared to my old Rebel XT it looks fantastic in higher ISO shots.

Overall, I'm more impressed with this camera the more I use it. I'm getting shots I just couldn't have before thanks to its small size, lightning-fast startup, and fast AF.

mattmtl said:

tehviking said:

Is there something I'm doing wrong? Do I need to crank up ISO sensitivity even in iA mode? Is that even possible?

Click to expand...

I think you should forget iA most of the time, and especially in challenging situations.

Use P, A, S or M (especially A set to wide open, or S at the slowest shutter speed that works for you), double check that OIS is active on both camera and lens, and use ISO 800 or 1600. If you want to use Auto ISO, you'll have to set it to max out at 800 or 1600 -- it defaults to 400.

At ISO 1600, you have to be extra careful that your shots are properly exposed -- noise and possibly banding may become issues with underexposure.

Many would also suggest RAW for challenging situations, but you can also accomplish a lot with JPEG by spending a few minutes adjusting the parameters of your chosen film mode, especially NR.

Even with all that, there's no getting around f3.5+ being pretty slow for indoor work. But with reasonable lighting, it is quite possible to get some good shots.

Click to expand...

The G1 doesn't but then the replaced it very quickly with the GH1 which has the best video going. The GF1 has video and so on. There is no doubt that most of the MFT are video and designed for it as well as still. You may not need it, but it is there and a lot of work was put in to making it pretty near right.

Robert
--
Ketchup is just over loved tomatoes.

I would also like to point out the GH1 from the sensor, to the electronic view finder to the lens, the shutter, etc. was designed around video.

Robert
--
Ketchup is just over loved tomatoes.

(The following is based on the G1. AFAIK the GF1 and GH1 behave exactly the same way, but you should check to be sure.)

To clarify: in iA mode, ISO will go up to 800. (Tested by shooting with the lens cap on; set focusing to manual to do this.)

In P, A, and S modes, setting ISO to Auto will give you an ISO no higher than 400 unless you go to ISO Limit Set in the REC menu (screen 4) and select some other maximum value. In M mode, there is no automatic ISO setting at all.

To further complicate matters, in addition to Auto ISO, there is Intelligent ISO (iISO), which is available in P and A modes and is also the method used by iA for setting ISO. In P or A mode, iISO respects the ISO Limit Set value, but has a default maximum of 800 instead of 400.

I don't generally use these auto ISO modes, so can't tell you how Auto ISO and iISO differ. I do find them confusing, and wonder why there isn't a single Auto ISO setting with consistent behaviour across all modes, including iA and M -- there's a wish list item for me.

As for the 14-45... it's by far the most economical wide-angle option on these cameras. That's the main reason I use it, outdoors for the most part but sometimes successfully indoors.

In addition to previous suggestions, I would use OIS in mode 2 : it is noticeably more effective for stills.

Thank you, that's a good tips. Do you mind explain why it is so? I tried and it seems to give me about half a stop better IS.

WayneRT said:

In addition to previous suggestions, I would use OIS in mode 2 : it is noticeably more effective for stills.

Click to expand...

--
=============================
My flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/testdasi/

Aex said:

Thank you, that's a good tips. Do you mind explain why it is so? I tried and it seems to give me about half a stop better IS.

WayneRT said:

In addition to previous suggestions, I would use OIS in mode 2 : it is noticeably more effective for stills.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

It's just the way it is designed. Mode 1 has OIS on all the time, which can help with framing in some circs.. Mode 2 switches it on as you press the shutter and generally gives better results, as you found.

--
Cheers

Trevor G

http://www.computerwyse.com/photo.html