That there is a problem my friend. The finders for 40mm are all 3/2 as far as I know. I use the 17mm and the finder and that works well. The lens is not as good as the 20 but it surely is no slouch either. I'd love to find a 40mm 4/3......anyone?
Would changing the aspect ratio to 3/2 in camera help at all? I'm thinking the fact that m4/3 cameras crop to get 3/2 will be a bit of an issue, but I can't quite get my head around the specifics Anyway to answer your question Joe, I'd get the EVF - i'm guessing it will display the same info as the LCD and so should prove useful in bright sunlight. Also you could use other lenses with the EVF whilst the 40mm OVF would be restrictive. Finally it'll be of more use framing images as you'd capture what you see in the EV.
I use the Voigtlander 28/35 mini finder. Seems that Cosina set the frame lines to be very conservative on this finder. The 28mm frame lines work well for the 17mm and the 35mm ones are fine for the 20mm lens. The finder is of course 3:2 but I usually shoot in that format. This finder is discontinued and is now very pricey if you can find one. I was lucky to have one that I had bought to use with my Ricoh GRD. -Thomas
I think you're right about the conservative framelines. I use a 35mm finder on my GF1 and even on a tripod test the view thru the finder was very, very close to what I was seeing on the LCD screen. The problem will be what ratio you choose to shoot at. I've been playing with the square format lately and obviously the finder doesn't help. Do you see a square in the EVF?
No, the framelines are all 3:2 so not very helpful for shooting square format. For 3:4 they are kind of okay, you can estimate the height to be the 28mm framelines and the width to match the 35 lines. Far from ideal, but beats the LCD in bright light. -Thomas
Cool beans. I have the Pen 1 and a Pen 2 on the way. I'll get the EVF for the 2 sometime when I get the itch for it. The EVF's work very well, I just don't like all the info in there....... Good Luck.
i just wrote, elsewhere, that the gf1 is the closest thing out there to a digital cle. the cle was a favourite kit along with the 3 dedicated lenses. the gf1 is about the same size, has the same 20 (40) focal length, if it had an optical or built in evf, it would be so much better. if i absolutely had to...i think i could live quite happily with this tiny kit. joe
I hear ya brother. My Pen is as close as it comes for me, to my M4 & 35 Cron. I know, I know but with the 17 and finder, all I do is see and release..... even with the 40, the screen ain't to hard to take...
i have a couple of rd1 bodies and a small kit of m lenses and i love the rf experience coupled with digital media...but this gf1 and the g1 are just too much fun...and i like the images they can produce. for me, this is a hobby, i have no deadlines or editors to keep happy. fun is a big part of why i do this.
Yessir, I follow your post at the other forum where you are the Mod.... I had the Rd1s and loved the image quality. In my mind, nothing has compared to that IQ yet and at only 6 MP. I sold the camera because the Rf made me crazy. In that forum for the Eppy..the guys kept going over and over how bad the RF was that eventually I believed them and sold the camera...what a mistake. I miss that one dearly.... It's good to see Rf Forum 4/3 section starting to come alive again....I love that entire board.
ah yes, the power of an internet forum. i put off buying an rd1 partly because of the bad press it got but after a few shots using it i knew it was my electronic soul mate. thw g series from panasonic is similar in that after using it for a short time i just loved it...too much fun. btw, the link in your sig is not working.
