John Black wrote:
Roger - How does the EVF size feel? Like a 40D, 5D? One of the previews I read somewhere said that the EVF had a very large view, but I didn't know how to interpret that. Big to compared to what? Any other comments regarding the G1 versus the Canon G10 would be interesting too.
The size is pretty much the same as the 5D viewfinder. But, and this is interesting; the G1 EVF makes focusing much easier than it is with the 5D, also if the 5D has an Ee-s screen.
The G10? Hmm... The G10 is a small P&S sensor camera. The 4/3 sensor in the G1 beats it in just about every aspect except of size. I think another very cool small camera beating the G10 is the Panny LX3.
John Black wrote:
Roger - How does the EVF size feel? Like a 40D, 5D? One of the previews I read somewhere said that the EVF had a very large view, but I didn't know how to interpret that. Big to compared to what? Any other comments regarding the G1 versus the Canon G10 would be interesting too.
I love the manual focusing on the G1. As soon as I turn the manual focus ring the image is magnified in the view finder making it extremely easy to get bang-on focus.
jvarszegi wrote:
The posted full-size pics are pretty unimpressive IMO. You could probably get better-quality shots from some pocket cams.
You know, it's funny how many people praise 'pocket cams'. Even the G9/G10 is being praised as 'DSLR'-like and I just don't see it. I took the G9 hiking and only used ISO 80. When I printed the pictures at 10x15 inches they don't even come close the quality of my Olympus E410/E420 pictures which can easily be printed at double that size. My Sigma DP1 pictures also turned out MUCH sharper and clearer than the G9 at large print sizes.
Pocket cams look great at small sized pics on the internet but try printing something and you'll quickly realize how deficient they are compared to a DSLR - even a cheap one. Not that surprising when you think about it...
Vern Dewit wrote:
You know, it's funny how many people praise 'pocket cams'. Even the G9/G10 is being praised as 'DSLR'-like and I just don't see it. I took the G9 hiking and only used ISO 80. When I printed the pictures at 10x15 inches they don't even come close the quality of my Olympus E410/E420 pictures which can easily be printed at double that size. My Sigma DP1 pictures also turned out MUCH sharper and clearer than the G9 at large print sizes.
Pocket cams look great at small sized pics on the internet but try printing something and you'll quickly realize how deficient they are compared to a DSLR - even a cheap one. Not that surprising when you think about it... ...Show more →
I know many things can affect quality. I am basing my assessment on owning the G9 (which I'm selling as I don't use it all that often), and the pixel-level sharpness in the posted pics. I'm not knocking the G1-- but there are pocket cams out there that can give equivalent quality to pics like these, at least in decent light outdoors. I'm not touting the superb quality of pocket cams; I'm just surprised that these pics are so soft (no offense to the OP or his technique meant in the slightest). You may have had different results with your E-410, which is of course an entirely different camera, and you are different, and you shot in different conditions, with a different subject.
It is worth noting that the more stunning pictures here are posted at a small size. They may also have been shot with different lenses, I wouldn't know. Note also that if you put a telephoto on the G1, it isn't nearly so small any more. It's already not much smaller than a small DSLR body.
I know what you're saying but by the same token, you're only seeing a few hastily snapped photographs from the G1 - there could be 1.2 million reasons why these particular photos aren't tack-sharp.
The E410 is not entirely different from the G1 since it's the same sized sensor. Since I've owned both the E410 and a G1, I'm well aware that the E410+70-300 was much heavier and bigger than the G1+45-200 and the G1 combo has IS which makes it that much more useful.
People are under estimating how much smaller and versatile the G1 is than the E-4xx series with many features that are better, plus a smaller form factor. Usually when a camera gets features like IS, tilt 'n swivel LCD, better AF and nicer ergonomics the camera gets bigger not smaller! The fact that the G1 gets all these upgraded features and still manages to be smaller is awesome! Any smaller and I wouldn't be able to hold the thing - and I have small hands.
Fair enough. I have to say that if I had the disposable cash right now, I'd own one already. I look forward to seeing the direction of the format. I think the liberation from the OVF is a great idea that was too long in coming.
jvarszegi wrote:
I think the liberation from the OVF is a great idea that was too long in coming.
Yep! I couldn't agree more. The EVF is way cool. Big problem for me right now is that the LCD 'gains up', even when you do an exposure lock. This will not work well with my GND filters - I need to see exactly what the picture will be when I actually take it. There must be a setting to change this, I haven't found it yet.
Vern Dewit wrote:
Big problem for me right now is that the LCD 'gains up', even when you do an exposure lock. This will not work well with my GND filters - I need to see exactly what the picture will be when I actually take it. There must be a setting to change this, I haven't found it yet.
There is a workaround, I can easily live with it, some find it a major pain and I agree Panasonic should have made this an user option. Anyway:
Lock the exposure and the press the garbage button. Now you can move around the camera without having the EVF automatically adjusting itself.
I think you should have the option Preview Hold, in the menu, for this to work.
John Black wrote:
Roger - How does the EVF size feel? Like a 40D, 5D? One of the previews I read somewhere said that the EVF had a very large view, but I didn't know how to interpret that. Big to compared to what? Any other comments regarding the G1 versus the Canon G10 would be interesting too.
I find it much more like the 5D than the 40D. Its really quite good and as has been mentioned I found manually focusing through the viewfinder was remarkably accurate. Really quite nicely done. There's a little jerkiness sometimes if the viewfinder has to jump the gain (maybe 1/8 or 1/4 of a second) and I almost wish there was kind of a "zoom in" feature rather than "jump to high magnification" with the longer lenses - like I mentioned I lost my subject a couple of times. But I've taken maybe 4 dozen shots with manual focus, I'm sure I'd get a lot better with a little practice.
The one thing I realized playing around today is there's not much point doing this with a larger lens like the 150 f2.0 or the 50-200 - once you've got a big lens, there's not much sense having a small body. But I could see using the 50 f2 or 35 Macro with the adapter. And the 25 f2.8 would probably be a great little combination, more like what I was hoping the Sigma DP-1 would be.
I just got to play with a G1 and was frankly blown away. I'm currently using a Canon 5D for serious landscapes, an oly e520 for travel w/ some serious photography aspirations and when I'm just traveling and my wife won't put up with much photography, a Canon G9. I also use the G9 for underwater videos when snorkeling. The purpose of the oly gear was to have a camera I didn't mind carrying all day-- the 5d and 24-70L, etc, is just too big and heavy. But the Oly the viewfinder is really, really small. The image output is good--surely not as good as the 5D, but quite useful.
I'd not considered the G1 because I imagined it to replace my G9 and it wouldn't do that (particularly the videos). I had read that it had a EVF and that meant it was written off my list, until today-- when a relative brought one to Thanksgiving.
The EVF is extraordinary! It's almost as good as the 5D-- sharp, quick responding, and BIG and brighter than any optical finder can be. If you follow a rapidly moving object or quickly pan the camera you can get a tiny bit of jerkyness. It does get a bit grainy in low light, but DSLR viewfinders in general don't do all that well in the dark with today's slow lenses. It's really, really good. Even better, this is the first camera I've ever used where I can read all the data in the viewfinder. You can easily change things with the camera to your eye. You can get a live histogram in the viewfinder. It's truly an extraordinary tool. And, of course, it has the articulated LCD. I've not had one of those since my Canon G1, and I've missed it. I'm just too old and settled in my ways to compose most pictures on the LCD-- I need a viewfinder. But there are just some pictures where the articulated screen is the difference between getting and not getting the image.
The Panasonic folks have really put a lot of thought into this camera.
The G1 has a very solid feel to it--much like the G9. They say it's plastic but it feels better built than the Oly gear. I'm totally sold and now have one on order.
It's true that a e-420 is almost as small but the Oly lenses don't have IS. The 520 has IS and is a bit much bigger though not much heavier.
The Oly gear is going on the Buy and Sell forum soon.
I haven't run into any unexpected IQ problems with the G1. Compared to the Olympus E-510 and E-3 I am happy to see the obvious banding problems to be gone as well as higher resolution.
The USAF charts above were deloped with ACR (E-510) and Silkypix 3.0SE (G1) and made before the new DNG converter was available. Now we can use other raw converters as well and ACR is better than Silkypix at this (and Raw Therapee beats them both).
Here is from the first days with the G1: http://photos.imageevent.com/jonas_b/fmforumsmonthly/fmforums2008/873_pelargonknopp.jpg
Above, A dying pelargonium makes an attempt. G1, Zuiko 90/2 Macro. The depicted part of the plant is approx 30mm. Not used to the samll sensor I stopped down to f/8 which made for some diffraction and also a tiny bit of movement.
It is hard to evaluate the background in the image above but I think there are some minor traces of blotchiness.
All in all I'm happy with the G1 images this far (not to speak about the viewfinder and the size and weight).
Great little article - I always enjoy reading his reviews. I came away with much the same impression as he did. I gotta get that 45-200mm lens yet. That 7-14 will complete the perfect little travel kit, capable of high quality pictures.
Vern Dewit wrote:
Great little article - I always enjoy reading his reviews. I came away with much the same impression as he did. I gotta get that 45-200mm lens yet. That 7-14 will complete the perfect little travel kit, capable of high quality pictures.
V.
I'm looking forward to the 45-200 and the four-thirds adapter as I have a Zuiko 2/50 macro lens I'm looking forward to using with the G1. I don't think either of these are available yet in the shops here in the US.
I snapped this on the way home from swimming this afternoon and it is the first G1 shot I've processed in ACR.
If I wanted to shoot outdoors in good light and have a lot of DoF, I'd get a G10. But that's not what I'm looking for in a camera - the G1 is a completely different beast, so I'm not sure why you'd even compare them.
