Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Digital Cameras & Shooting Techniques => Topic started by: lensfactory on November 13, 2008, 03:39:03 pm
-
Seeing as MR has a picture taken with one, and that they are starting to ship ($800), i'm curious what you all think...
I have the Olympus e-420 w/25mm pancake lens and enjoy a DSLR in such a small size/combo.
I don't see any advantage to the G1...as I understand it, it is not any smaller then the e-420 and still has a smaller sized sensor. It is my feeling, that despite all the technical specs/ details of various 'engines' etc etc...it mostly comes down to sensor size...no?
Why would I pay $200 more for this over the e-420?
I DO like the fully articulated LCD screen and wish all the DSLR's would have this (now that they all have liveview). I think for most of us, we'd be using liveview on a DSLR when the camera is in an 'awkward' vantage point...precisely the time an articulated screen would be handy.
This seems similiar to the Sony R1 that came out years ago...A limited use camera with good IQ. Perhaps if you need a 'quiet' camera, but other than that...too big for a P&S and limited functionality over a DSLR.
Will have to get dwon to the shop and try it for myself.
-
The lenses are a lot smaller. You'll be able to use them on even smaller future cameras (such as the oly that was shown at photokina).
The E-420 isn't interesting to me but I'm leaning towards buying a G1.
-
It is my feeling, that despite all the technical specs/ details of various 'engines' etc etc...it mostly comes down to sensor size...no?
The sensor in the G1 is the same size as that in the E-420.
-
Fortunately, that's not the case at all. The sensor found in the G1 is the same size as that in the E-420, but the mirror-box and prism have been eliminated, allowing for a shorter lens-to-sensor distance, and as a result, smaller and lighter lenses.
As a result of the very advanced new contrast-detect AF system and the high-quality, fast EVF, the G1 has all the same capabilities as a DSLR except for in a few specific situations, and more capability than a similar SLR in a few specific situations.
-
So it seems $200 more for ...er...quiet operation? Will DOF be affected by the shorter distance between sensor and lens? The acchilles heel of P&S cameras is their inability to shoot with a shallow DOF.
Bet these new 'smaller' and 'lighter' lenses will cost 'more money' than their slightlylarger,heavier counterparts. Doesn't seem a very big jump...
Perhaps the Oly version will be small enough to warrant me buying this system...
-
So it seems $200 more for ...er...quiet operation? Will DOF be affected by the shorter distance between sensor and lens? The acchilles heel of P&S cameras is their inability to shoot with a shallow DOF.
Bet these new 'smaller' and 'lighter' lenses will cost 'more money' than their slightlylarger,heavier counterparts. Doesn't seem a very big jump...
Perhaps the Oly version will be small enough to warrant me buying this system...
dof is a function of the focal length and shooting aperture of the lens, so no. The dof for a 25mm f1.4 on this camera will be exactly the same as the dof of a 25mm 1.4 on the E-420. As far as imaging characteristics go, it makes more sense to think of this camera as a DSLR without a mirror box, rather than a p+s with interchangeable lenses. p+s with interchangeable lenses is where the form factor may (hopefully) end up going, but the imaging characteristics will not.
-
So it seems $200 more for ...er...quiet operation? Will DOF be affected by the shorter distance between sensor and lens? The acchilles heel of P&S cameras is their inability to shoot with a shallow DOF.
Bet these new 'smaller' and 'lighter' lenses will cost 'more money' than their slightlylarger,heavier counterparts. Doesn't seem a very big jump...
Perhaps the Oly version will be small enough to warrant me buying this system...
And a smaller system. Provided you'd like to use more than just a 25mm pancake lens.
-
I got one recently. It handles remarkably like a basic DSLR, with responsiveness about the same as my D40. It's smaller and lighter, but not really "different class of camera" smaller.
Image quality seems basically comparable except for resolution, where the G1 stomps the D40. D40 flash sync is way better, and there's no equivalent of a small bounce flash like the SB-400 for the G1. The G1 viewfinder is much better in some ways, but is worse in others, especially in low light with a slow lens. The articulating display is great though.
The really killer feature for me though is the face-detecting autofocus. Trying to photograph a jumpy 4-year-old with a D40 and a fast lens is an exercise in (mis)focus-recompose frustration. With the G1 and an adapted regular 4/3 lens, my hit rate at f/1.4 has gone through the roof, even though the adapted lens focuses much slower than the kit lens. I can't wait for Panasonic to release their 20mm f/1.7.
-
I have the Olympus e-420 w/25mm pancake lens and enjoy a DSLR in such a small size/combo.
I don't see any advantage to the G1...as I understand it, it is not any smaller then the e-420 and still has a smaller sized sensor.
Though I tend to agree with your E-420 vs G10 comparison in another thread, I think you are way off on this one: the E-420 and G1 each have significant advantages over the others, that are compelling for users with different priorities.
The G1 offers:
- the same sensor size as the E-420, but with the expected improvements from a year or two of tchnological progress.
- IS, though only through a few Panasonic OIS lenses rather than my preferred in-body approach.
- an EVF with a far larger image size than the E-420's optical VF, and with 100% coverage. (Better in these respects than any APS-C DSLR's VF too.)
- a large, articulated LCD, widely held to be a big advantage when using LCD LiveView.
- far less shutter lag than the E-420 in LiveView mode, though probably not as good as the E-420 when using its optical VF and phase detection AF.
In many ways (sensor, articulated LCD, VF image quality, IS availability), the Panasonic G1 is in fact closer to the forthcoming Olympus E-30 while being significantly smaller, lighter and cheaper. I would prefer the E-30 though for its ability to stabilize all 4/3 lenses including the two I already own, and its fast 11 point phase detection AF.
-
Seeing as MR has a picture taken with one, and that they are starting to ship ($800), i'm curious what you all think...
I have the Olympus e-420 w/25mm pancake lens and enjoy a DSLR in such a small size/combo.
I don't see any advantage to the G1...as I understand it, it is not any smaller then the e-420 and still has a smaller sized sensor. It is my feeling, that despite all the technical specs/ details of various 'engines' etc etc...it mostly comes down to sensor size...no?
Why would I pay $200 more for this over the e-420?
I DO like the fully articulated LCD screen and wish all the DSLR's would have this (now that they all have liveview). I think for most of us, we'd be using liveview on a DSLR when the camera is in an 'awkward' vantage point...precisely the time an articulated screen would be handy.
This seems similiar to the Sony R1 that came out years ago...A limited use camera with good IQ. Perhaps if you need a 'quiet' camera, but other than that...too big for a P&S and limited functionality over a DSLR.
Will have to get dwon to the shop and try it for myself.
Remember that "mirror lockup" thingie? Remember why people lock up those mirrors? Remember mirror vibration? The G1 doesn't have those things. It's important, so important, that the one and only SLR I ever owned (Leica R3 Safari) I gave away at a white elephant exchange.
-
I think Panasonic went with a traditional looking DSLR just to get acceptance and get the ball rolling. We should remember that this platform will allow many variations of body, P&S, rangefinder, HD, etc that all take the same lenses. So don't judge the G1, judge the concept and the fact your eventual lens collection may be many times more useful than having it only dedicated to one body type/manufacturer.
Steve
-
I think Panasonic went with a traditional looking DSLR just to get acceptance and get the ball rolling. We should remember that this platform will allow many variations of body, P&S, rangefinder, HD, etc that all take the same lenses. So don't judge the G1, judge the concept and the fact your eventual lens collection may be many times more useful than having it only dedicated to one body type/manufacturer.
Steve
I think you shouldn't put the cart before the horse. We ARE talking about a whole new series of lenses they expect you to invest in after all. If the flagship model is far from a real change..from either what's offered by small dslr's (e-420) or larger P&S (G10), then I think it is an abject failure. To chalk it up as a 'good try' doesn't cut it in my book. DO judge the G1. Who has money to spend on a 'concept' and a hope that 'your eventual lens collection may be many times more useful'.
Reminds me...in camera history...of the 'half-frame' cameras they developed in the early sixties. A lemon. I think DSLR's and P&S's will fill up this,at best, marginal niche that this 'micro 4/3' system is trying to fill.
-
I expect to buy one. As soon as I can find one.
-
I think you shouldn't put the cart before the horse. We ARE talking about a whole new series of lenses they expect you to invest in after all. If the flagship model is far from a real change..from either what's offered by small dslr's (e-420) or larger P&S (G10), then I think it is an abject failure. To chalk it up as a 'good try' doesn't cut it in my book. DO judge the G1. Who has money to spend on a 'concept' and a hope that 'your eventual lens collection may be many times more useful'.
Reminds me...in camera history...of the 'half-frame' cameras they developed in the early sixties. A lemon. I think DSLR's and P&S's will fill up this,at best, marginal niche that this 'micro 4/3' system is trying to fill.
Some people don't get it, but this person from Cameralabs (whatever) never got it. SLR's are antiques - 50 year old mirrorbox technology, like buggy whips. Get used to new tech, or stick to the antique venues.
-
Some people don't get it, but this person from Cameralabs (whatever) never got it. SLR's are antiques - 50 year old mirrorbox technology, like buggy whips. Get used to new tech, or stick to the antique venues.
Whos' 'this person from Cameralabs'?
My feeling is that I don't have to get used to the 'new tech' but rather the new tech will have to accomodate me..the consumer.
50 year -old mirrorbox technology...ya...so. Ever heard of the wheel? Still going strong after more than 50 years!
If they came up with a technology that allowed you to look through a lens and NOT use any other optical 'viewer' than your eyes...then yes, that would be an improvement. As it stands now though, even the BEST electronic viewing systems,LCD screens, et al, can't compete with the optics we were born with.
Perhaps when an electronic optical device can be hard-wired to our brain's optical network...then we could improve upon our eyes. Until then you can't beat the SLR system I'm afraid. And an oversized "P&S" with interchangeable lenses is no improvement over either...in my opinion. Not small enough, expensive new lens system, and IQ no better than a cheap DSLR. WHat's the advantage?!? Maybe if you work in stills...or where you need a quiet camera.
What do you 'early apopters' see in it?
-
This would make a great street camera. I'd buy one if the high iso was decent.
I wonder if in removing the mirror box they encountered the same issues as leica with the M8 or perhaps the sensor is small enough to avoid them.
-
http://www.outbackphoto.com/CONTENT_2007_0...c_G1/index.html (http://www.outbackphoto.com/CONTENT_2007_01/section_gear_cameras/20081119_Panasonic_G1/index.html)
-
I think DSLR's and P&S's will fill up this,at best, marginal niche that this 'micro 4/3' system is trying to fill.
Except that after P&S this 'marginal niche' market is the highest selling camera group, the 'bridge' camera or 'prosumer' camera, take your pick. People will migrate up to Micro Four Thirds from P&S cutting out the prosumer designs, and people will move from DSLR's to Micro Four Thirds.
The ultimate success of current DSLR's is by no means assured, unless you think people actually like carrying around large heavy lenses, and often large bodies to mount them on (admittedly there will always be a 'look at me I'm a photographer' type out there to disprove this idea of portability). You can't get away from the fact that in a world where miniaturisation can lead to smaller and lighter machines the fundamental design of DSLR lenses will remain forever frozen in the ice age. And while it may be possible to make DLSR bodies marginally smaller, they are already at about the limit they can go without producing a very unbalanced package on which to mount the lenses. Like the woolly mammoth, your DSLR dreams are going to become extinct.
Steve
-
Except that after P&S this 'marginal niche' market is the highest selling camera group, the 'bridge' camera or 'prosumer' camera, take your pick. People will migrate up to Micro Four Thirds from P&S cutting out the prosumer designs, and people will move from DSLR's to Micro Four Thirds.
..... Like the woolly mammoth, your DSLR dreams are going to become extinct.
Steve
To clarify...what you call 'prosumer' I call P&S. I don't believe that consumer group will move up from P&S cameras to these non-mirrorbox DSLR's (whatever you want to call them) UNLESS the bodies are super-cheap and the interchangeable lenses are cheap,as they offer no other substantial reward over the traditional DSLR than size.THey will just stick to the super-zoom midsized digital cameras currently offered (as they will remain cheap and get better in IQ).
I don't believe that when you get to this size a few inches either way is a big deal. These cameras are aimed mostly at existant pros and speculative pro-sumers.
These caveman proclamations are a wish...as there is NOTHING to subsantiate this, scientifically. I could say "like the wheel, the DSLR design will constantly be enhanced and used in new inventive ways."AS I stated, only when we have a tool hard-wired to our optic nerve network in our brain could we possibly improve upon our eyes. DSLR's use our eyes more in the viewing systems. The rest use EVFs which are inferior...
...simple
-
The rest use EVFs which are inferior...
...simple
In case you don't spot the irony, you review your images on an electronic LCD on the camera, you process your images using a electronic screen, you print your images using and electronic printer. These are deemed suitable to asses and produce an image via electronic means. No?
But all of these have an evil past of poor quality, in the sense you wouldn't now use a ten year old design of LCD, or screen, or printer, yet somehow the EVF, which has been around quite a while and has been constantly developed still ranks as 'inferior'? Well in some aspects yes, in others aspects it makes the conventional viewfinder look positively archaic. As with many things you win some you lose some, but never on any camera is it 'win win'. Anyway, here is a party trick the EVF can do that many top DSLRs can't, it gives a 100% coverage. And here is a party trick an EVF can do that no conventional viewfinder DSLR can do, it can increase the gain so you can see better to compose and focus in dim light. I'm sure I could go on, but the gist is that the baby shouldn't be thrown out with the bathwater.
Steve
-
Doesn't it have a histogram option, too?
-
And here is a party trick an EVF can do that no conventional viewfinder DSLR can do, it can increase the gain so you can see better to compose and focus in dim light. I'm sure I could go on, but the gist is that the baby shouldn't be thrown out with the bathwater.
Steve
Yes it can do a few things that an optical viewfinder can't, but the image is just so inferior.Oh I'm sure your right that it will one day be there....but not yet. Maybe in about ten years. I'm talking about an EVF of high enough quality to replace an optical viewfinder ie. the human eye.
-
I wonder if in removing the mirror box they encountered the same issues as leica with the M8 or perhaps the sensor is small enough to avoid them.
m4/3 lens designs should be able to avoid the problem that some short focal length rangefinder lenses have with electronic sensors. The problems for those Leica wide-angle lenses is that they use near-symmetric lens designs, which are optically nice and more compact than SLR lens designs of equal focal length, but have a low exit pupil height, meaning that light reaches the corners of the 35mm frame at a substantially off-perpendicular angle: maybe even more than Kodak's off-set microlens approach can handle.
But most digital cameras are already mirrorless (all the small sensor compacts plus the Sony R1 and Sigma DP-1 and DP-2) and these often use lens designs that are more compact due to allowing the rear lens elements to sit close to the focal plane while still having a high enough exit pupil to work well with the sensors of those cameras. These lens need to be somewhat retro-focal at wide angles, so are not as compact as traditional rangefinder wide angle lenses, but there is still more design flexibility than with an SLR lens. The lenses for the Sigma DP-1 and DP-2, a 16.6mm f/4 wide angle and 24.2mm f/2.8 "wide normal" respectively for Sigma's 25mm diagonal sensor, might give a hint as to what is possible with small primes for mirror-less cameras using DSLR sized sensors. But I am far more interested in smallish zooms, like a 2x wide and a 3x standard.
Anyway, the bottom line is that eliminating the mirror only adds design options that SLR's do not have, it does not rule out any design choices, including simply using existing SLR lens designs in some cases (like telephotos): m4/3 lens designers simply have more options and trade-offs to choose between. I can imagine some entry-level m4/3 lenses being designed to be as small, light and inexpensive as possible, at the cost of relying on some software correction for light fall-off towards the edges of the frame --- after all, that is good enough for Hasselblad with its 28mm! Higher level m4/3 lenses could instead favor stricter optical performance standards at the cost of being less compact.
-
Played with a G1 today. With lens it is quite small. The viewfinder is tremendous. Just huge. I'm sure it has some issues but in normal light it is great.
-
MR didn't bother to mention that the Olympus e-420 is about the same size as the G1. I think the e-420 DOES deliver on the promise of a cheap ,fully featured and SMALL DSLR.
OMG!!!! THere is shutter sound on the G1?!?!? THe only reason I would ever consider spending more for a camera like this is because I thought it would be completely silent.
A lemon for sure....
-
MR didn't bother to mention that the Olympus e-420 is about the same size as the G1. I think the e-420 DOES deliver on the promise of a cheap ,fully featured and SMALL DSLR.
OMG!!!! THere is shutter sound on the G1?!?!? THe only reason I would ever consider spending more for a camera like this is because I thought it would be completely silent.
A lemon for sure....
The thing to note, Lensfactory, is how small the lenses are by comparison to the E-420's kit lenses. And consider that they're stabilized... so to match that you have to upgrade to the E-520, which is quite definitely larger than the G1.
A lemon for sure? Because it's only a little smaller than the current smallest product and it produces an audible, though quiet, shutter noise? Kind of quick to pass judgement there, one would think...
-
The thing to note, Lensfactory, is how small the lenses are by comparison to the E-420's kit lenses. And consider that they're stabilized... so to match that you have to upgrade to the E-520, which is quite definitely larger than the G1.
A lemon for sure? Because it's only a little smaller than the current smallest product and it produces an audible, though quiet, shutter noise? Kind of quick to pass judgement there, one would think...
Well...not the pancake lens, but anyway...
The whole point of a camera like this is to offer something MORE than a DSLR..in my opinion. Not quick to judge....just making a judgement. Let's see in a year if my judgement holds up. Bet it will.
I just think it's sad that this doesn't have a silent shutter for doing film stills work. That would be one of the few places a camera like this would serve much of a use.
I do like the articulated LCD...frankly ALL cameras should have that. Buying more lenses, for a marginally smaller camera seems like a marginal improvement in technology....so whoopity-do.
-
MR didn't bother to mention that the Olympus e-420 is about the same size as the G1. I think the e-420 DOES deliver on the promise of a cheap ,fully featured and SMALL DSLR.
OMG!!!! THere is shutter sound on the G1?!?!? THe only reason I would ever consider spending more for a camera like this is because I thought it would be completely silent.
A lemon for sure....
Blah blah blah. DSLR's are still dying. Not dead yet, but you can hear the death rattle. Very similar to the "instant return mirror" clatter. Yes, wheels are still used on buggies.
-
Well...not the pancake lens, but anyway...
Well, seeing as there's a 20mm f1.7 coming out for m43 in 2009 that's not only smaller but faster than the current pancake...
I just think it's sad that this doesn't have a silent shutter for doing film stills work. That would be one of the few places a camera like this would serve much of a use.
...one of the few places besides 90% of the other applications for which one might use a similarly-priced DSLR, that is...
-
Yes it can do a few things that an optical viewfinder can't, but the image is just so inferior.Oh I'm sure your right that it will one day be there....but not yet. Maybe in about ten years. I'm talking about an EVF of high enough quality to replace an optical viewfinder ie. the human eye.
I do wonder if you've actually looked through the G1's EVF. It is extraordinary. It's as big as my 5D's vf and you have to try to get any jerkyness in the flow. (That said I don't think it'd be ideal for sports). It's brighter than any optical vf I've ever used and for the first time I can read the control setting in the vf-- all of them. Not only can you see the various settings but the controls make it easy to modify them w/o taking the camera from your eye. Add to that a live histogram available in the view, and it's the EVF that has sold me on the G1.
It's true that in dim light it gets sort of grainy, but it doesn't get too dim like optical slr finders. I will say that it always looks like you're looking at video and if you can't accept that then any evf in the the foreseeable future won't work for you. However, if you can accept the slightly un-natural look of video it's a world beater.
-
However, if you can accept the slightly un-natural look of video it's a world beater.
I agree.
I would have one now but I just can't get myself to pay list.
-
I would have one now but I just can't get myself to pay list.
Prodigital2000 on eBay out of Canada is auctioning them (typically going for about US$550). Or there are various buy-it-now's, some in the US$650 range, and if you're not allergic to Microsoft's live search cashback, you can probably even get another 15-30% off of that. So if you want one, you can get some pretty good deals if you look around.