Hi,
I essentially agree with your view. Mr Dubovoy choose the GH2 as a lightweight camera for telephoto lenses and as such it did the job it was intended to do.
Now, Mr Dubovoy normally to use hand made precision equipment like the Alpa and Leica S2 he uses. These cameras have probably a very nice feeling of general precision which a mass made camera doesn't possess.
In my view it's OK for Mr Dubovoy to indicate the difference, he essentially says that he is not comfortable with the haptics of the Panasonic. He certainly indicates that it did the job it was intended to do.
On the issue of the Leica failing, these are things that can happen to any camera. On the other hand, a camera built in large series will be more tested in real life conditions. One interesting aspect of Mark's experience is that the problem may have been stuck aperture. Lloyd Chambers had a similar failure on the 180/F3.5 APO Elmar. A similar problem on a similar lens?! At least Leica made a real effort to replace the lens swiftly!
Michael Reichmann had a Hasselblad zoom lens falling apart in Namibia. It seems that those zooms had a tendency to have the front lens group falling out. Hasselblad was not very forthcoming in taking responsibility for those lens failures, putting the blame on the owners.
In general I have great respect for Mark's writing. He seems to be obsessed with precision and perfection, nothing wrong with that. He is writing about high end stuff.
As a comment, I happen to have a couple of Sony cameras, among others an Alpha 900 and an Alpha 55SLT. The Alpha 55 has electronic viewfinder with live view. The 55SLT is very flexible and does a good job. The Alpha 900 has more buttons, more heft and better image quality and much better viewfinder.
I'd suggest that the future is electronic viewfinder, interchangeable lens. Electronic viewfinders right now are in my view not close to optical viewfinders on full frame DSLR yet, but we will certainly see a lot of development in that area.
Best regards
Erik Kaffehr
I have a GH2 and was amused by the complaints about its construction; it's a consumer grade camera--why shouldn't it feel like one?
My first real SLR was a Canon AE-1. It was a pioneering camera in many ways, including it's use of plastic in the body. I recall all the gnashing of teeth about this, but it was a smashing success. Just about all consumer level cameras are plastic these days, and the GH2 is no exception. However, the only plastic camera I've ever owned that really felt cheaply built was a Canon 300D. Plastic is ok, really, and these cameras have metal frames.
As the writer said, he was tired of dragging around 35mm digital pro gear. Plastic makes it a lot lighter. Sometimes cheaper is better.
I moved from using a Canon 5D and L lenses to the panasonic, and certainly the GH2 feels more cheaply made. Still I find it to be good enough.
I will disagree more strongly about Mr. Dovony's comments about the EVF... yes it freezes after every exposure for an instant, but having a live histogram in view all the time, and being able to set most controls without my eye leaving the VF is priceless.
Finally about reliability... clearly this isn't a significant sample -- 2 cameras-- but it was the Leica that failed. You could buy several GH2s for the cost of a 1Ds.
They say the best camera is the one you've got with you. I'm in Hawaii this week, carrying the GH2, the 7-14, 14-140 and 100-300 lenses. That's the equivalent of a range of 14mm to 600 mm in 35mm full frame terms, and it's all in comfortable sling bag. the whole kit weighs less than my 5D and 24-70 f2.8 L lens alone. I can carry all of this all day with any trouble. In Europe this spring I did a lot with just the 20mmf1.7 and 14mmf2.5 pancakes. With those on the GH2, it's almost pocketable.
And-- spectacular video at a push of another button!
