i have found maxmax to be very helpful and hope you are happy with the results.

on another note, i have had several folks tell me that they really prefer the g9 over the g10, have you had the opportunity on your camera search to have an opinon?

Ann,

I reviewed the difference between the G9 and G10. There are two features about the G10 that attract me, the compensation knob on the left and the wider angle lens. THe G10 also has 14.7 mp compared to 12.4 mp for the G9 but I doubt that one could see the difference in practice.

The only major decision I had to make was to choose between the conversion options, which are UV+Visible +Infrared, Infrared-Only at 715nm, or Infrared-Only at 830nm. The first option would require purchase of a number of filters. Conversion to 830 nm results in loss of two stops but gives more dramatic look than 715 nm so I decided for 830 nm since I usually use my cameras on a tripod anyway whenever possible.

The bottom line is that I have the G9 already and have been pleased with the results so having it converted is a fairly inexpensive way to play around with infrared. So even if this does not work out as well as I hope it won't be such an expensive mistake.

Sandy



i have found maxmax to be very helpful and hope you are happy with the results.

on another note, i have had several folks tell me that they really prefer the g9 over the g10, have you had the opportunity on your camera search to have an opinon?

makes sense.
i have a fuji s9100 that i got from maxmax that i use for IR, i have to use a filter, i have been using their ldp but am not sure i am happy with the colors, and then i have a filter that allows me to take "regular" type images.
another nice thing about the fuji is i can hand hold if needed.

with my d100 and a wratten 87 it is tripod only , black and white and long exposures.

but have been trying to find a "in the pocket" point and shoot for those times i don't want to carry around a lot of equipment. That is why i asked about the differences between the two. I do like the way the g10 is set up, but as i haven't had an opportunity to look at the panasonic i am not ready to purchase anything.

Ann,

As far as I can tell there is no difference in handling between the G9 and G10. I have held both of them and the basic controls and feel are the same on both models.

There is a pretty big differnce in feel between the Lumix LX3 and the G10. The LX3 is quite a bit thinnier and would fit in a pocket easier. On the other hand, the G9 and G10 have a viewfinder that is very useful when shooting outdoors in the sun.

Sandy




That is why i asked about the differences between the two. I do like the way the g10 is set up, but as i haven't had an opportunity to look at the panasonic i am not ready to purchase anything.

Ann



with my d100 and a wratten 87 it is tripod only , black and white and long exposures.


as a keen IR fan (still searching for a HIE replacement) I understand your issues with exposure times on the D100. I'm waiting to get back home to hack my Coolpix 990 to be IR compatible (turns out that its quite simple compared to DSLRs) It will become my previsualisation and light metering rig for 35mm and LF IR photography.

If you are considering the G10 then perhaps a Panasonic G1 will be not much different yet will give you advantages that the G10 has not. Despite being a Canon owner I'm now trying to get my hands on a OM-1 (and 21mm 50mm and 100mm lenses) so that I can do IR with that, and share lenses with my G1. So far the FD lens by adaptor experience has been really good. With the light weight of the bodys it makes a great hiking rig and I get to use the lenses differently on each body.

It makes a mean macro rig with a few cheap extension tubes. This image is "toe of my boot" balanced and "live view" focused while kneeling on the ground.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3664/3545428526_74b451eaf8_m.jpg
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3664/3545428526_7309686669_o.jpg)

its got a bigger sensor than the G10 and you get to use the kit lens too (with good Image Stabilisation)


just food for thought

lol lol

just more information to clutter my mind.

i will be in a pro type camera store at the end of the week and so hope they will have several of the mentioned types that i can handle first hand.

ann

Ann,

And yet another camera to consider is the Olympus E420. It is a real four thirds DSLR, with intercdhangeable lenses, but even smaller than the Panasonic G1. The four thirds sensor is almost as large as APS and the E420 can be had for much less than the Panasonic G1. Maxmax does conversions on the E420.

Sandy





lol lol

just more information to clutter my mind.

i will be in a pro type camera store at the end of the week and so hope they will have several of the mentioned types that i can handle first hand.

ann

Sandy


And yet another camera to consider is the Olympus E420. It is a real four thirds DSLR, with intercdhangeable lenses, but even smaller than the Panasonic G1.

respectfully the G1 is a real 4/3rds camera and has the same sized sensor as all the other 4/3rds cameras. It simply has a shorter registration distance between the mount and the sensor allowing the mounting of even more lenses (pen F and the lovely Cosina lenses that come on the Voigtlander 35mm rangefinders). It is lighter and smaller than any of the SLR styles and slightly more so than the E420.

If you are unfamiliar with the camera please examine images G1 here (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicdmcg1/page4.asp) and 420 here (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/OlympusE420/page3.asp). note that the 'depth' metric includes the eyepiece in the G1 diagram and does not (trying to fudge the 420 into havint smaller dimensions).

I think that the 420 is quite a compact camera if you get to hold the G1 you'll find its more compact. They weigh the same however. As you can see below (G1 on left) the lighter Anti-alias filter and the slightly higher pixel density on the 4/3 sensor yeilds sharper images

http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/PanasonicDMCG1/Samples/Comparedto/Studio/PanasonicG1_ISO100-ACR-crops.jpghttp://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/OlympusE420/Samples/Comparedto/oly_e420_ISO100-ACR-crops.jpg

if you're interested please dig around on my blog for my user impressions and bits

PS

I just was thinking about your wording of:

real four thirds DSLR
and wonder if the emphasis was intended to have been

real four thirds DSLR

in which case while I agree that it lacks an optical view finder I find that this brings as many advantages (perhaps more) than disadvantages. Clearly this will be usage dependent. Personally I now use the 'viewfinder' for reviewing shots as I find that in bright light I can see everything better. This gives me the strange situation of composing on the tilt screen and reviewing in the viewfinder.

Being able to zoom in to the image to confirm focus in the EVF is also quite handy.

My intention was simply to suggest the E420 as a reasonable substitute for smaller sensor cameras, not that the Panasonic G1 is not a real four-thirds camera. I think the GI and E420 are very interesting because of their weight and compact size and fill a niche between the larger DSLR and the smaller sensor cameras like the Canon G10 and the LX3.

I have not compared the G1 and E420 feature by feature, but the significantly lower cost of the E420 might be important to many given that the size and performance seems about par.

Sandy






I just was thinking about your wording of:

and wonder if the emphasis was intended to have been


in which case while I agree that it lacks an optical view finder I find that this brings as many advantages (perhaps more) than disadvantages. Clearly this will be usage dependent. Personally I now use the 'viewfinder' for reviewing shots as I find that in bright light I can see everything better. This gives me the strange situation of composing on the tilt screen and reviewing in the viewfinder.

Being able to zoom in to the image to confirm focus in the EVF is also quite handy.

My intention was simply to suggest the E420 as a reasonable substitute for smaller sensor cameras, not that the Panasonic G1 is not a real four-thirds camera. I think the GI and E420 are very interesting because of their weight and compact size and fill a niche between the larger DSLR and the smaller sensor cameras like the Canon G10 and the LX3.

I have not compared the G1 and E420 feature by feature, but the significantly lower cost of the E420 might be important to many given that the size and performance seems about par.

Sandy

My only comment here is that I also have been wanting an IR only D-camera. I am ambivalent as to what to consider body wise.

I like the idea of having the ability to change lenses using my current collection of Canon lenses but at the same time I don't want to lug around 1 more DSLR body, so the idea of a small high quality PS converted to IR has a lot of appeal.

Since the demise of Kodak HIE, I've been hoping for a digital solution. My best option now is to use a Canon A75 P&S with and IR filter. Exposures are slow and the capture is only 3 meg. Mounted on a tripod the camera can produce credible shots.

Too many choices out there I'm afraid.

So much for my drivel,

Don

My intention was simply to suggest the E420
as a reasonable substitute for smaller sensor cameras,


thought so ... glad I added it :-)


but the significantly lower cost of the E420 might be important to many given that the size and performance seems about par.


definately! The 420 is about 1/2 the price of a G1 I've recommended the 420 to my younger cousin (who's just starting out).