Canon 400D to Panny GF2?

[tobsmonster2]

I've had a 400D for a couple months now, and I've really enjoyed shooting with the 18-55mm kit lens. However it is a relatively old camera and there are a few modern features (LiveView in particular) that I'd like to have.

Anyway, I was thinking of selling the 400D and grabbing a GF1 or GF2 as they're going quite cheap at the moment.

Considering I only really do portrait and close up shots, would a GF2 be a worth while upgrade?

Thanks.

 

[frank]

I've had a 400D for a couple months now, and I've really enjoyed shooting with the 18-55mm kit lens. However it is a relatively old camera and there are a few modern features (LiveView in particular) that I'd like to have.

Anyway, I was thinking of selling the 400D and grabbing a GF1 or GF2 as they're going quite cheap at the moment.

Considering I only really do portrait and close up shots, would a GF2 be a worth while upgrade?

Thanks.

I went from a Canon 40D to the GF-1 but not for the same reasons, mine was purely making the load lighter by not having to lug a dslr and various lenses around, also I'm not getting any younger and health problems at the time was thwe main reason.

The GF-1 is a great little camera especially with the 1.7 20mm lens which I have, the 100-300 lens is not too bad either though not as good as L lens , I don't stick to portraits etc anything goes with me. Bear in mind the GF-1 is getting old too.
The GF-2 I have not used a GF-2 so I can only comment on what I have read, it's not all that much different from the GF-1 apart from the touch screen which I didn't fancy. Having said that I'm still happy with the GF-1 but could maybe still depart from M43,the Canon s95 or 100 is in my sights at the moment, or even the Fuji x10. I'm still reading about them.

If you want to stick with Panasonic M43 then the GX1 has had some good write ups and is apparently better than the GF models, so if it is in your budget then it's worth a look at.

Alternatively you could save and get better quality lens for the 400D, there is a larger amount of choices for the Canon than there is for the GF-1 and better too. You will find a big difference with a quality lens than the kit lens, I'm sure other will be in soon telling you the same.

 

[samems]

M43 is so much different. To me, it was not the same. I much prefer the OVF, the snappier focussing and the speed of the DSLR.

 

[Mandoo]

I made the move from Canon DSLR to M43 and although it suits me, you do loose out on a few things that the DSLR offers. The main issues you'll find with a GF model are the lack of a viewfinder and the speed of operation and focusing that the DSLR offers.
I went for the G2 as it was more of a compromise between the two ranges, but its not as small as the GF models. It does however have the EVF which I couldn't do without. Its not as good as an OVF though, but a mile better than no view finder at all.

You really need to think about what you want out of the camera, what features you need and are the lenses that you need available in the fitting you want.

Personally if I knew then what I know now, I probably wouldn't have sold up my Canon kit, I'd have kept it to run along side my M43 gear as a DSLR is loads better in some respects where the M43 kit just doesn't cut it. The biggest issue I think you'll find is the handling as the GF models really aren't suited to macro in my opinion.

Don't forget that just because a camera is old, it doesn't mean it doesn't do the job its supposed to do. The 400D is still capable of fantastic shots provided the user is up to it too. If not, no camera is going to get great shots!

 

[samems]

Got a 550D myself and well happy with it. Tried a G3 but totally dif beast. DSLR anytime!

 

[tobsmonster2]

I went from a Canon 40D to the GF-1 but not for the same reasons, mine was purely making the load lighter by not having to lug a dslr and various lenses around, also I'm not getting any younger and health problems at the time was thwe main reason.

The GF-1 is a great little camera especially with the 1.7 20mm lens which I have, the 100-300 lens is not too bad either though not as good as L lens , I don't stick to portraits etc anything goes with me. Bear in mind the GF-1 is getting old too.
The GF-2 I have not used a GF-2 so I can only comment on what I have read, it's not all that much different from the GF-1 apart from the touch screen which I didn't fancy. Having said that I'm still happy with the GF-1 but could maybe still depart from M43,the Canon s95 or 100 is in my sights at the moment, or even the Fuji x10. I'm still reading about them.

If you want to stick with Panasonic M43 then the GX1 has had some good write ups and is apparently better than the GF models, so if it is in your budget then it's worth a look at.

Alternatively you could save and get better quality lens for the 400D, there is a larger amount of choices for the Canon than there is for the GF-1 and better too. You will find a big difference with a quality lens than the kit lens, I'm sure other will be in soon telling you the same.

Thanks for giving such a detailed answer. I was actually looking at getting the 20mm as I thought it'd be a good prime length for portraits, while not being too tele for group photo's etc.

I'm not majorly fussed about using M4/3 or anything, it's just that the GF2 is selling for around £150-£180 used and I was hoping to sell my 400D for around that price, making it a free upgrade essentially .
Looking at it now I think I might actually prefer a GF1 over a GF2 for the additional buttons and dial. Plus I've ready the GF1 can be hacked to include a lot of the features the GF2 got, which is another plus.
Maybe I'll get a GF1 & 20mm now, then move back to a Canon crop or full frame when I feel the need for more lenses (and have a bit more money to spend ).

If I did keep the 400D and save up for a better lens (probably wouldn't be able to afford an L though), could they possibly improve things like AF accuracy? That's one of the things I that's letting me down with the 400D, and I find it really difficult to observe whether somethings in or out of focus using the view finder when shooting in MF.

 

[Mandoo]

Well if you're struggling with focus on the 400D, its only going to be worse on the GF1 because it doesn't have a viewfinder. Screen's only really work well in the optimum conditions, as soon as you get a bit of sunlight, you're stuffed basically. You may be better off with a G1 or G2 as they have the EVF which magnifies the focal point when using manual focus.
Also, as regards to AF accuracy, M43 are worse as the AF is much slower. Again, if you;re struggling with that on the 400D, it'll be worse on the GF1. A better lens on the 400D would most likely see an improvement on this as the kit lens is right down at the bottom of the scale.
I'm not sure why you're struggling so much with MF on the 400D viewfinder though as I've always found OVF's much better to use than screens of EVF's.

Edit: I should point out though that the GF1 and 20mm is a great little combo for portraits and general walkaround. If I had the money I'd be adding one to my kitbag, but I can make do with my G2 and 14mm for the foreseeable.

 

[tobsmonster2]

Got a 550D myself and well happy with it. Tried a G3 but totally dif beast. DSLR anytime!

Thanks for sharing that samems. What was it you didn't like about the G3 over the 550D?

Well if you're struggling with focus on the 400D, its only going to be worse on the GF1 because it doesn't have a viewfinder. Screen's only really work well in the optimum conditions, as soon as you get a bit of sunlight, you're stuffed basically. You may be better off with a G1 or G2 as they have the EVF which magnifies the focal point when using manual focus.
Also, as regards to AF accuracy, M43 are worse as the AF is much slower. Again, if you;re struggling with that on the 400D, it'll be worse on the GF1. A better lens on the 400D would most likely see an improvement on this as the kit lens is right down at the bottom of the scale.
I'm not sure why you're struggling so much with MF on the 400D viewfinder though as I've always found OVF's much better to use than screens of EVF's.

Edit: I should point out though that the GF1 and 20mm is a great little combo for portraits and general walkaround. If I had the money I'd be adding one to my kitbag, but I can make do with my G2 and 14mm for the foreseeable.

Glad you've said that. Portraits and street photography is what I enjoy doing most so anything in the 35-55mm focal range is great for me. The G1 seems like a good way to go in that case, though I doubt I'd find one with a 20mm included for <£200.

I'm not sure what the problem is myself. Some photos I take with the 400D using MF come out fine and as crisp as they looked in the OVF, but others the focus is just slightly off what I thought I saw in the OVF and I end up missing the shot.
Also, though it's usually reliable in decent lighting, the AF is slightly off as well sometimes and I lose out on detail. Both of these are a big problem for me as on the street I'm normally moving from place to place and rarely get the opportunity to correct the focus and retake the shot .

Here's an example. The dog was walking along slowly behind its owner, and even with a shutter speed of 1/1000 the fur looks smoothed and lacking detail:

EDIT: Completely forgot about the slower AF on the G series cameras (contrast being slower/less accurate than phase shift?), but with that zoomed in manual focus feature on the G1 & G2 I think I'd be alright. The main reason I starting flicking the AF on with my 400D was, because I couldn't trust the MF.

 

[ps2user]

I've just brought a GF2 for my wife and will be testing it out with this weekend. And will see how it feels compared to my ageing 5D. I thought it also be good that i could use it for video as it be an expensive upgrade from 5D to 5D mk3.

Was the photo manual focus or auto? The shutter speed is high and so would of produced a sharp photo is focus was right. The patch of grass just underneath the dog's jaw looks sharp in focus. Without being rude is the lens back focussing or technique issue?

 

[Mandoo]

The grass looks to be in focus so it could be a problem with the setup like a faulty lens or something, or possibly a problem with the user (and I mean that in the nicest possible way! ) Were you using manual or auto focus for that shot?
Don't forget that the 400Ds kit lens really is the bottom of the range so even spending something like £45 on the mk2 version with IS should give you an improvement.

 

[tobsmonster2]

Ah sorry, I should've mentioned that shot was with AF on.

I've just brought a GF2 for my wife and will be testing it out with this weekend. And will see how it feels compared to my ageing 5D. I thought it also be good that i could use it for video as it be an expensive upgrade from 5D to 5D mk3.

Was the photo manual focus or auto? The shutter speed is high and so would of produced a sharp photo is focus was right. The patch of grass just underneath the dog's jaw looks sharp in focus. Without being rude is the lens back focussing or technique issue?

That's great, let us know how you get on with it .
I had AF enabled that entire day, but I did have it set to auto select focus point at that time - which may have been the problem .

The grass looks to be in focus so it could be a problem with the setup like a faulty lens or something, or possibly a problem with the user (and I mean that in the nicest possible way! ) Were you using manual or auto focus for that shot?
Don't forget that the 400Ds kit lens really is the bottom of the range so even spending something like £45 on the mk2 version with IS should give you an improvement.

Definitely open to the idea of trying a new lens when I have the cash for one. I've actually had someone offer me a nifty fifty for £50, but all I had to offer in return is my kit lens .

In MF or AF I obviously wait till the subject looks crisp in the VF and then I fully depress the shutter, and it seems like it's down to a roll of a die whether or not the image comes out as crisp as it looked. There's a little dial beside the VF (which I've read is to assist glasses wearers), and I wonder if that's the problem?

Think I've got my heart set on a M4/3 camera now though (G1,G2,GF1); I had a really tough time deciding whether or not to bring my DSLR with me today, and though I got some good pictures, the extra baggage wasn't appreciated.

TL;DR:
Thanks for the help guys, it's really been helpful and much appreciated .

My final question is if there is anyway to know if the little knob by the view finder has been set incorrectly?

 

[Mandoo]

I can't remember how to check, but on my old 350D that little bobbin moved really easily and regularly needed adjusting. Does the information text in the viewfinder change focus if you twiddle with it?

 

[fatmarley]

I had problems with AF speed and accuracy with my 450d. It's much better since I changed it to 'one shot' and I now only use the centre focus point.

 

[ernesto]

I had AF enabled that entire day, but I did have it set to auto select focus point at that time - which may have been the problem .

Definitely open to the idea of trying a new lens when I have the cash for one. I've actually had someone offer me a nifty fifty for £50, but all I had to offer in return is my kit lens .

Even letting the camera select the focus for you it should have picked on the dog I would think but clearly didn't in this case and hit the grass, maybe it doesn't like dogs
Have you tried a centre focus point and does it still give you problems?

I use a 50 1.8 which is a cheap solution to getting a fast focusing lens and I love it. However it would be the same as using the longest end of your zoom so be good idea to check through your shots and see which focal length you favour. If you are using the 18 end more than the 55 you may be frustrated with the 50.

 

[justin44]

I bought a GF2 with 20mm as a light carry around but never take it out! I just find it hard to use due to lack of buttons. Call me old fashioned but I just can't get on with it. IQ is great I just don't like the feel of it. I also have a G10 which I like but is getting on a bit a 20D which is great but big to carry around and I just got an X100 which I'm still playing with.

I'd say skip the GF2 and get a good GF1.

 

[tobsmonster2]

I can't remember how to check, but on my old 350D that little bobbin moved really easily and regularly needed adjusting. Does the information text in the viewfinder change focus if you twiddle with it?

Gave it a little spin just just now, but turning it to the right only made things more blurry. It was already rolled all the way to the left when I started, and in that position the text was most crisp.

I had problems with AF speed and accuracy with my 450d. It's much better since I changed it to 'one shot' and I now only use the centre focus point.

Even letting the camera select the focus for you it should have picked on the dog I would think but clearly didn't in this case and hit the grass, maybe it doesn't like dogs
Have you tried a centre focus point and does it still give you problems?

I use a 50 1.8 which is a cheap solution to getting a fast focusing lens and I love it. However it would be the same as using the longest end of your zoom so be good idea to check through your shots and see which focal length you favour. If you are using the 18 end more than the 55 you may be frustrated with the 50.

That's exactly what I've been doing actually . I'd planned to upgrade to a nifty fifty, but I've got zero cash to spend at the mo. 50mm is a great length for the photo's I like to take, though it's a little more tele on the crop sensor than I'd like, and that got me thinking about the panny 20mm.

Aaaanyway, shooting in AF using the centre focus point is more reliable than the auto setting, but sometimes it just doesn't get the focus and pulls back and forward (like when you try to use AF in the dark).

The previous owner looked after the camera well and it came to me in good condition, so I'm willing to believe it could be something I'm doing wrong. I guess I'll figure that out when I get a new lens or camera, but for now I'll just keep shooting, because I'm loving it and having so much fun .

Thanks again for all the help guys .

 

[tobsmonster2]

I bought a GF2 with 20mm as a light carry around but never take it out! I just find it hard to use due to lack of buttons. Call me old fashioned but I just can't get on with it. IQ is great I just don't like the feel of it. I also have a G10 which I like but is getting on a bit a 20D which is great but big to carry around and I just got an X100 which I'm still playing with.

I'd say skip the GF2 and get a good GF1.

Yes! I was thinking the same. Just judging from the pictures, I imaged just losing the mode select dial would be troublesome enough itself, not to mention all the other buttons. Definitely looking for a G1, G2 or GF1 & 20mm now. If I don't find one of those, I'll hang on to the 400D and save up so I can try a better quality lens. I've taken some really nice shots with the kit lens, but if it's a low end (and crappy ) as everyone's suggesting, upgrading the lens could unlock some real power in this camera for me.

 

[fatmarley]

Aaaanyway, shooting in AF using the centre focus point is more reliable than the auto setting, but sometimes it just doesn't get the focus and pulls back and forward (like when you try to use AF in the dark).

What AF mode are you using? AI Focus, One shot or AI Servo?

 

[tobsmonster2]

What AF mode are you using? AI Focus, One shot or AI Servo?

again, I should've mentioned that. I was using One shot AF.The dog wasn't really moving fast at all though, so using servo wouldn't make much difference?

 

[ernesto]

servo wouldn't have made much difference as the camera was focusing on the grass - unless the grass was moving around a lot

If your camera is hunting with a centre point AF in good daylight it doesn't sound right to me (unless you point it at a lot of completely white things which upsets mine, understandably)

 

[Mandoo]

It sounds like there is definitely something wrong there then. The camera really should not be struggling so much in good light using centre point AF on one subject. Its got to be a faulty lens or camera, I think.

Edit: Just noticed you've got the 400D listed for trade on AVForums. I'd be careful if I were you as you could be in for a whole lot of hassle if it turns out something is faulty. You're also going to struggle to get what you want on trade as the 20mm lens is worth over £200 on its own.

 

[tobsmonster2]

It sounds like there is definitely something wrong there then. The camera really should not be struggling so much in good light using centre point AF on one subject. Its got to be a faulty lens or camera, I think.

Edit: Just noticed you've got the 400D listed for trade on AVForums. I'd be careful if I were you as you could be in for a whole lot of hassle if it turns out something is faulty. You're also going to struggle to get what you want on trade as the 20mm lens is worth over £200 on its own.

Are there any simple tests I can do to check if it's a hardware fault? The camera has been well looked after so I'm hopeful it isn't at fault, but if there's anything I can do to check, that'd be great .

Didn't realise the 20mm was so pricey , might look into getting an alternative.

 

[Mandoo]

Not really sure what you can do to try and test for problem, do you have an independent camera store anywhere near you that may be able to take a look?
As for trading for a Panasonic, the best setup you could probably get would be the G1 and 14mm lens. They both sell for around the £100-110 mark each second hand. With the CSC format being a 2x crop factor though you're looking at a 28mm equivalent. It's basically the same as using your current 18-55mm at 18mm all the time which might be too wide for some.

 

[tobsmonster2]

Not really sure what you can do to try and test for problem, do you have an independent camera store anywhere near you that may be able to take a look?
As for trading for a Panasonic, the best setup you could probably get would be the G1 and 14mm lens. They both sell for around the £100-110 mark each second hand. With the CSC format being a 2x crop factor though you're looking at a 28mm equivalent. It's basically the same as using your current 18-55mm at 18mm all the time which might be too wide for some.

Did that calculation my self when I started looking into this , and yea the 14mm/28mm effective is far too wide for me. Looking over my shots I couldn't actually find a single shot that wasn't zoomed in at least a little bit .

I think I'm going to save my self some trouble and just hold on to my 400D . I'll save the upgrading for when I can out-and-out afford it.
Thanks again everyone for the help and advice, especially you Mandoo for coming back with so much info. Cheers.

 

[Mandoo]

No worries buddy. I'm no expert myself, but when through exactly the same dilemma as you at the beginnning of the year.
I went from a 350D to a G1 14-42 combo and loved it. I then upgraded the body to a G2 a couple of months ago as I wanted the touch screen and video, and then added the 14mm and 45-200mm to my line up. I love the format and have been a big fan of Panasonic for years so the next step will be to add a GF model to the bag as a smaller walkaround.
There is an Olympus 17mm that goes fairly cheaply for CSC that might be an option, but I don't think its optically as good as the 20mm models. They go for around the same price as the 14mm, but don't crop up in the classifieds as often.