Sam Bennett wrote:
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.
I was referring to the prints. IMHO people are raving about the G9/G10 class of cameras but I've seen large prints and they don't seem to compare to the quality a camera like the G1 can achieve. That's all I meant. Obviously there are massive differences between a P&S and an SLR type camera.
I think what is worth noting jvarszegi is that it's obvious you have not handled the G1 with the 45-200. It is not small - it's positively tini. Shockingly small in a marvelous way. A way which opens up new possibilities.
I spent an hour shooting one in a store today. The image quality is superb. As soon as I get the 24 pc-e for my D700, the panasonic is next on my list and if the images I saw it take with those humble lenses are any indication, the D700 may get a lot more rest in the future. This thing is wow!
Pavel wrote:
I think what is worth noting jvarszegi is that it's obvious you have not handled the G1 with the 45-200. It is not small - it's positively tini. Shockingly small in a marvelous way. A way which opens up new possibilities.
I spent an hour shooting one in a store today. The image quality is superb. As soon as I get the 24 pc-e for my D700, the panasonic is next on my list and if the images I saw it take with those humble lenses are any indication, the D700 may get a lot more rest in the future. This thing is wow!...Show more →
I agree...I handled one for a good while about a week ago. I had taken my G9 along for size comparison and they are very similar, altho' the very small 14-45 lens protrudes (of course) on the G1. I really liked the EVF--I shoot with a 5D and 400D---and I have dled 9 RAWs, processed all in LR 2.2 and printed several at 11 x 17 with the 3800. I've been waiting for a camera like this (for hiking, travel, long days of walking with no photographic intent where I would def. want the 5D and specific lenses)--I really dislike shooting with the G9 and rarely use it. So--last night I won an auction on Ebay with the Canadian store so many have bought from--a quite large savings over US stores. I should have mine next week. I don't plan to buy another lens until I shoot awhile with the kit (which most think is just very good), but know I need a fast lens and maybe one longer one (not sure if I'll buy the 45-200---which is available, 2 were sitting on the shelf as I tried the G1) since I don't shoot a lot over 90mm. 90-400 is WAY overkill for me LOL, but then who knows, this could change some of my shooting ways.
I don't have any alternative lenses but am def. considering some with adaptor eventually since everyone raves about the MF focusing--how easy, accurate and I like MF.
What excites me most about this camera is the ability to mount just about any legacy lens, including Leica M lenses, with proper adapter. My G1 arrives today, and I'll be eager to get an M adapter to use my M lenses. What a perfect travel/street camera!
Tried one out today, VERY impressed with the size and handling. It's tiny (that 14-45 is about the length of, and much smaller diameter than a Canon 50mm f1.8). The EVF is quite good in most regards (poor colour, a little jello when panning, but very sharp and the MF assist is brilliant).
The click-wheel idea is also brilliant. Hope everybody else copies it for their 1-wheel interfaces.
I'm now seriously interested in one. Almost bought it today in fact.
Ohhhh. You guys are not playing nice! This is going to cost me money!
Can any of you post some wide open very close shots with any of the leica, voight or Zeiss glass?
The reason I'm asking is I want to get an idea of how the dof will turn out - if the system is any temporary substitute for good narrow dof portraiture. I know it's not the purpose but I would love to be able to get the occasional shot like I can with the D700 and a 85 at say f 2.8 - or does it look more like f 5.6 would look?
One thing not mentioned yet, but very noticeable to me was how this absolutely tiny camera feel better in the hand than many bodies that are much larger. I find it as good to hold if not better than the D80 for example.
It's a heck of a first salvo here. I sure hope Oly and Panasonic keep the micor 4/3 focus! ( pun intended )
So you took a 5D (not one of the smaller DSLR bodies) and mounted a huge horking lens on it. I have nothing to respond to. Try doing an actual comparison with a small DSLR body. Like, for instance, the E-420. It's really not much smaller, and it's still not pocketable, as far as that matters.
jvarszegi wrote:
So you took a 5D (not one of the smaller DSLR bodies) and mounted a huge horking lens on it. I have nothing to respond to. Try doing an actual comparison with a small DSLR body. Like, for instance, the E-420. It's really not much smaller, and it's still not pocketable, as far as that matters.
The 5D's pretty average sized as DSLR's go. Solidly in the middle of the range.
The G1's significantly smaller than an E-420, and that will be even larger in difference once the 20/1.7 Pancake is available (when the G1 with the 20 will be the same thickness as a E-420 without a lens). The E-420 is 130x91x53mm with no ergonomic grip, the G1 is 124mmx84mmx45mm with a ergonomic grip. The difference is much more notable with the kit lens attached because the E-420 is then almost a full inch thicker (Due to both the ~20mm in register difference and the Panny 14-45 being smaller in all dimensions than the Oly 14-42). The G1 is comparable in size (in fact smaller with lens mounted) than many super-zoom P&S's.
There doesn't seem to be very much reason to buy the G series any longer, that's for sure, even if the lens does retract into the body. I always thought the Lensmate adapter was a mite silly, since you might as well tote a bigger camera.
I'm looking forward to the release of lenses like the 20 f/1.7, Olympus's first take on EVIL, and the first stabilized body.
mawz wrote:
The 5D's pretty average sized as DSLR's go. Solidly in the middle of the range.
There you go.
mawz wrote:
The G1's significantly smaller than an E-420, and that will be even larger in difference once the 20/1.7 Pancake is available (when the G1 with the 20 will be the same thickness as a E-420 without a lens).
Still not a huge difference if you, say, mount the 25 pancake on the E-420. Not what I would call the ultimate demonstration of the size advantage of m43. And the 20 ain't available.
mawz wrote:
The difference is much more notable with the kit lens attached because the E-420 is then almost a full inch thicker
Sure, but both are even further away from pocketable then. Not much of a value proposition, size-wise, since the convenience is not much greater than with a lot of gripless DSLRs.
mawz wrote:
The G1 is comparable in size (in fact smaller with lens mounted) than many super-zoom P&S's.
Yes, I'd always pick a G1 over such a POS. But I'd always pick an SLR over one, as well.
jvarszegi wrote:
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.
Hi there,
...is the glass half full or half empty?
The G1 is already as small or even smaller than many wants it. The point is to get good small lenses.
Long lenses will never be that much smaller. What the short register distance can really help with is allowing for smaller normal and wide angle lenses. For example; the advertised and longed for Panasonic 20/1.7 is a pancake, in the same size as the Olympus ZD 2572.8 - but a stop and a half faster. Of course, when writing "is" it shows my hope for the lens to materialize. The Panny 7-14 mockup is also a small lens. The Nikon version will be bigger than the Panny lens and the G1 together...
The ability to use all sorts of adapted lenses also make it possible to get a camera with the equivalent of a 100mm lens with the speed of 1.4 and the DOF of 2.8, at small size and price (or a huge prize if you want to use the later Leica M-mount lenses, lol).
The image quality is what you get from a 4/3 sensor. It is not the best in the world but it will do just fine in many cases.
I hope I haven't repeated too much of everything already posted.
Which makes it a good comparison. Remember the 40D is the same size, and a 40D body is priced close to a G1 these days.
Still not a huge difference if you, say, mount the 25 pancake on the E-420. Not what I would call the ultimate demonstration of the size advantage of m43. And the 20 ain't available.
The E-420 with the 25 pancake is about the same depth as the G1 with the 14-45 OIS zoom. That's a HUGE effective difference in size, since you're getting a stabilized zoom in a smaller package than a pancake prime (Since there's still the 1/2cm difference in the other two dimensions). Note the E-420 body's about as close in size to the D90 as to the G1 (not counting the grip measurements since the E-420's lack of a grip makes that dimension an ineffective indicator of actual camera depth with a lens mounted).
Sure, but both are even further away from pocketable then. Not much of a value proposition, size-wise, since the convenience is not much greater than with a lot of gripless DSLRs.
Yes, I'd always pick a G1 over such a POS. But I'd always pick an SLR over one, as well.
Well, a lot of people are picking those "POS's" for their size advantage over DSLR's (which is there for the most part, unless comparing a DSLR with a pancake prime to a P&S with a 10-12x zoom which is a pretty useless comparison)
Now you're emphasizing how big the G1 is.