I have a small (make that embarrassingly large) kit made up of leftover cameras (7) and lenses (8) kicking around home for my own use, occassional school jobs and just becasue (old cameras are worthless, except to the owner). The problem is I guess, all the cameras and lenses are capable no matter how cheap or basic, some are even spectacular and I am stubborn about using everything i have, finding an ideal purpose for each and every item.
The shining lights are my second G9, once relegated to video rig use only, now classed as a “general hauler” matched with it’s Leica 12-60 and the other is the Pen F.
The Pen F is a killer camera with it’s quirks, but loads of character. It also comes with a “preciousness quotient” which is to say, it will not be a day to day hack camera. It is a fine art pro camera or serious enthusiasts tool, and it has some non-pro oddities.
Negatives are the sum of several minor quibbles.
It has poor electronic shutter performance at higher ISO’s (banding), a manual shutter that makes a “flappy” mechanical sound, especially when fired vertically.
The exp-comp control is a dedicated ring, but requires a two finger turn. This is a feature I use constantly, so I find it frustrating.
It can be uncomfortable, but the expensive little grip helps.
The on-off control annoys me for some reason and I have a habit of turning it off (can’t say why).
It has only one door for the card and battery and it does not feel “long term”.
No phase detect tracking focus.
It is heavy, surprisingly heavy, especially for a camera with no weather sealing. The heft is reassuring, but this thing feels like it is as heavy as an EM1x in the hand (but isn’t).
The back screen, probably meant to be optional only on this camera, is so flush with the camera, I find it hard to flip open. I guess the idea is to ignore it like it is not there, a bit like the Fuji X-Pro 3 where it actually isn’t, but the view finder is not the biggest or best they have made. Probably not a negative really :).
The video, something I would not use on it is nice, but it has zero external sound options and no 4k (why even bother?).
Performance is otherwise similar to an EM10 mk2, except for the special sensor, JPEG abilities and bespoke build.
In many areas it is over built, in some it seems well under done. It is almost like the mandatory but designer-disliked digital bits were farmed out to the spare parts division, the rest lovingly given to semi-retired film camera elves to make.
The Pen F sensor is very different to the EM1’s. It has a no phase detect pixels, producing very sharp and delicate images (even for MFT), although the high ISO performance sits below the newer sensors. It performs to me, like a fully evolved EM5 mk1 sensor, which is not a bad thing at all.
An area the Pen F is different to most is in it’s handling of JPEG’s. With dedicated “film” looks, a bit like a Fuji, but more natural looking and with an enormous amount of tweaking possible, it was the hobbyists dream camera. Hidden a little by that, but logical I guess, the camera produces very good mono images from it’s RAW files also.
Good black and white conversions from digital are not as easy as you might assume. Contrast, especailly deep blacks, clean whites and strong micro contrast are missing in straight conversions, so you need to apply firm but delicate processing with a film users awareness of what is missing. Shooting film for 20+ years helps here.
Of these two images above (using the 30mm), I could accept either, but the mono is far more robust and to me more exciting as a genuine point of difference to the norm. The muted colour is interesting, but if I am going to shoot mono, this is the camera for the job. Even the noise becomes more grain-like, much like the old EM5 mk1 files.
Often with digital mono conversions, I feel the need to push the contrast and clarity sliders more than a little. With the Pen, I seem to respond to more “grown up” tones. In film parlance this is similar to the difference between a “hot “ film like FP4 with a sharp “S” curve (brilliant highlights, deep blacks, short trip between the two) vs a “cool” film like Tri-X with it’s smoother shadow and highlight roll-off, gentle whites and softer blacks. The camera also has 4 custom functions, so plenty of playing around to be had with a latent memory of your experiments.
Aside from the look and character (and I feel different head space) mono brings, it also removes most CA issues, all colour oddness, allows for haze and flare to be repaired and even ignores most banding. Black and white already has a different set of strengths and weaknesses, the Pen F seems to emphasise these.
A straight JPEG in Mono 2 (apparently Kodak Tri-X like) with +1 highlights and slight yellow filtering using the 15mm. I can add grain, different effects, different film looks, colour sensitivities and tones. Too many options. As a preview, a reminder even, it is good and in large super-fine JPEG, it is often enough.
Of course in digital you get both colour and mono if shooting RAW and a neat quirk is that the manual focus peaking reverts back to colour, so you even get a mono to colour preview option.
*
Lenses for the Pen F have always been assumed by me to be the 17mm and 45mm f1.8’s and the old half-frame Pen 25mm just for fun (and good results). The 17mm often came kitted with the Pen F and the 45 is the obvious partner, but I have two alternatives.
The two that I have put aside, have similar quirks (read annoying realities for day to day pro work), but can also produce that special something, as long as your job does not depend on it.
The Leica 15mm f1.7 is a tad harder/contrasier/cooler/crisper looking than the 17mm. The 17mm’s strengths lie in it’s handling of tough, even strong lighting situations and deep transition Bokeh (forgiving depth of field traansitions). The 15 is more about bringing out the best micro detail, glow, edge to edge sharpness and some modern 3D pop, although again the real differences are minimal.
The main reasons I dislike the 15mm for work are actually mechanical. The aperture ring, always active on a Panasonic camera, is far too light, the hood comes off every second time I pluck it from my bag and the AF on an Olympus (where the aperture ring thing goes away) is a half step behind in reliability.
The 17 makes an ideal day bag lens. It is simple, robust and reliable with a handy MF clutch for video.
The 15 is a better personal projects lens, where you have time to enjoy it’s gorgeous build and refinement and very stable imaging quality, without it’s all too touchy annoyances pissing you off.
The 15mm also feels just right in MF, which ironically is a stiff switch control. So more reliable and the also very light and smooth throw and direction are ideal. This is something that should have been perfect on the 17mm, but never sat as well. The Leica just seems to work. I use white peaking and accurately hit what I want often using my pinky to focus.
*
The second lens is the 30mm Sigma f1.4.
This is a transcendent lens in many ways. Super sharp wide open, even sharper stopped down a little with great separation, although the latter can be a little two dimensional looking. It is the portrait-Bokeh king and a lot of fun.
What is not so much fun is it’s wild and seemingly random CA and some interesting (which is a bad word here) flare combined with mixed AF performance over my range of cameras. Rather than just relegate it to studio work (also a Pen F happy place), I intend to use it for self motivted work.
Lovely separation, interestingly muted colour and sharp.
Even wide open, it is sharp, but there is the hint of CA oddness, something that goes away in black and white.
A much more stable image.
What both have in common is a look that should be best supported by the equally interesting Pen F.
I am especially excited about black and white with this combo as the main issues with the Sigma tend to go away in a black and white work space.
This was a tough image to get up in colour. Nearly impenetrable shadows that washed out to milky mush when lifted. The Dehaze slider, which usually fixes this, robbed the image of it’s delicateness. The Pen F and Sigma were both stretched, but in mono, it held together very well, showing off that f1.4 Bokeh.
Not a confidence inspiring colour capture.
MF with the Sigma is nice, with decent throw, a huge and smooth focussing ring, which also turns the right way, but at f2-1.4 I rely on AF. A shame I cannot use back button AF focussing on the Pen F.
If these were tools, they would be the tip of the spear, specialist ones. The ones that may break if handled badly or inappropriately, but are required for the very best results, like a super slim filleting knife or even a scalpel.
The third lens for this outfit is the 75mm, but that has other work to perform.