Cameras
Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 Review: World's First Micro Four Thirds Digital Camera
Posted by John Mahoney at 7:00 AM on November 19, 2008
Companies that aren't Canon or Nikon have it rough in the digital camera market--particularly outside the cheap point-and-shoot area. Some band together for strength in numbers, creating cooperative standards like Panasonic, Olympus and Leica's new Micro Four Thirds system--a spec for smaller cameras with digital viewfinders like a compact, but interchangeable lenses, manual controls and higher performance like a DSLR. We tested Panasonic's 13-megapixel Lumix G1, paying close attention to the fact that it's the first contender in a totally new camera category and--like that other G1, the Android smartphone--it sets the stage for what's to come.
There is a single photo that you should think long and hard about before deciding whether to plunk down $US800 for the G1. And oddly enough, it wasn't even shot with the camera itself. Want to see it?

Yeah, there it is--the G1 posing next to my Canon Rebel XT. As you can see, for all practical purposes, they are the same size and shape. The G1 is smaller by a hair, but unless you're carrying both at the exact same time, it's a difference you would never, ever think about. This seemingly small fact completely undermines the system's potential to set itself apart from the big boys' entry-level DSLRs, which are the G1's direct competitors whether Panasonic likes it or not. The G1 fails to deliver on Micro Four Thirds' potential to produce cameras with small, unique form factors—those Leica-style "digital rangefinders" we pined for when the system was announced—that could be very worthy of your consideration. For now, an entry level Canon or Nikon DSLR is a better bet, coming in with humongous lens and accessory systems and lower price tags.
The thing is, a Micro Four Thirds camera doesn't have to look like a conventional DSLR. There is no pentaprism, which allows for a direct through-the-lens viewfinder in a DSLR and is responsible for the traditional bulge up top. There is no long legacy of lenses and hardware that dictate how the camera body should be formed. But there the G1 is, with its faux prism bulge and totally traditional DSLR shape.
Panasonic apparently chose this route to drive home the fact that the G1 is a serious camera, not just a gussied-up point-and-shoot. I guess that makes some logical sense for a minute, but for people who buy a $US800 camera based on more criteria than just the way the body looks (read: most), it will probably prove to be a fatal mistake. Which is too bad, because when form factor is ruled out, Micro Four Thirds' unique characteristics show a lot of potential for greatness. Let's look at those.
Live Viewfinder
When you look through the G1's viewfinder, you see a digital image of the sensor's live view output. Generally this is a really terrible way to compose a photograph, but the G1's is actually really usable. It's not jerky at all in good light (it does tend to slow down in low-light, though), and it's sharp, bright and clear for focusing thanks to a resolution of 1,440,000 dots. It's the best digital viewfinder I've ever used personally.
For auto focus, the G1 uses a 23-area contrast-based system, again because there is no mirror to reflect light to a dedicated AF sensor found in most DSLRs (contrast detection is also occasionally used by DSLRs when they're in live view or video capture mode). It tended to work well in good light and in bad. Manual focus is also possible, but a zoomed-in view PIP-style—like many DSLRs have—would have been nice.
There is a dedicated button for switching between the digital viewfinder and the LCD, which you can swivel out from the camera's back. There's a sensor next to the viewfinder that automatically switches between the two depending on where your face is.

The Sensor
Micro Four Thirds (like the Four Thirds true-DSLR system that came before it) gets its name from the 4:3 aspect ratio of its 13-megapixel "Live MOS" sensor. The sensor is basically a hybrid compact/DSLR type--the 4:3 aspect ratio is more common in compacts (although you can set the aspect ratio to the more traditional DSLR standard 3:2 easily), but the sensor's physical size is more on par with the APS-C sensors found in low-end DSLRs. That's a good thing, because a bigger sensor always equals less noise at high ISO sensitivities, more control over limited depth of field, and better image quality all around. That's why the prospect of a truly compact camera with a Micro Four Thirds sensor is so exciting.
As you can see, though, with the lens removed the sensor is directly exposed to the elements. If you have an industrial grade clean room in your house, I would advise changing lenses in there. Dust spots on your sensor are the worst.

Interchangeable Lenses
Right now there are only two Micro Four Thirds lenses: The 14-45mm/F3.5-5.6 kit lens and a 45-200mm/F4.0-5.6 telephoto zoom. Thankfully, you can mate the G1 with the larger selection of standard Four Thirds lenses via an adaptor (which includes some nice high-end Leica glass). Here you see a Lumix/Leica 14-40mm mounted.

Controls
Controls and menus are generally well thought out. There's a bunch of flexibility built in here--from the customisable ISO intervals (full or 1/3 stop) to the handy Quick Menu—which lets you access just about all of the basic shooting functions from within the viewfinder without diving into a menu.
Mad props for the clickable main scroll wheel. I don't know if this is standard on Panasonic's other performance cameras, but it's incredibly helpful--a single press cycles between controlling the aperture or shutter speed (depending on your mode) to setting a quick exposure compensation or going between shutter and aperture in full manual mode, all with a single wheel. Nice.
I can easily live with the annoyances noted above, balanced as they are by the niceties I also mentioned. However, the G1 does have three dealbreaking drawbacks:
ISO Noise
Noise levels are not great. Here you can see a progression of shots from ISO 100 to ISO 3200. As you can see, ISO 3200 is pretty useless:

And here, a quick and dirty crop comparison with a Rebel XT (which is three generations old, keep in mind) at ISO 1600 (the XT's max). Even my three-year-old Rebel does better at ISO 1600. The Micro Four Thirds sensor is large, but it's still smaller than APS-C and not as adept at handling noise as Canon or Nikon sensors, which get trickle-down sensor tech from noise-busting high-end cameras. You can see the full uncropped 1600 images here: G1 ISO 1600, Rebel XT ISO 1600
No Video
This makes absolutely no sense: The G1 does not have a video capture mode, even though all the challenges of recording video on an SLR are completely non-existent here. Panasonic has said that its future Micro Four Thirds cams will have HD video. This is precisely where the system has a natural leg-up on entry-level DSLRs and it's a shame—perhaps a fatal omission—that the G1 couldn't take part.
Cost
Panasonic G1 with 14-45mm f/3.5-5.6 kit lens: $US799
Canon EOS Rebel XSi with 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 kit lens: $US669
Nikon D60 with 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 kit lens: $US599
As long as that's the competitive landscape, the G1 has no chance.
Conclusion
I am optimistic about Micro Four Thirds, but there's just no reason anyone should buy a G1. Less money could get you a real DSLR that is, for all practical purposes, the same size. The G1's digital viewfinder is excellent, but it's no comparison to looking at the real world as you shoot. Factor in the G1's relatively poor high-ISO performance and tiny lens selection and it's a no brainer.
All is not lost for Micro Four Thirds. Remember Sigma's DP-1, the super-compact, rangefinder-looking point-and-shoot that packed a DSLR-sized sensor and manual controls? Micro Four Thirds could add to that paradigm a great electronic viewfinder and a system of interchangeable lenses. How about a Leica M-looking body with a few interchangeable prime (not zoom) lenses? What about using actual Leica lenses via a rumoured M-mount adaptor? Sign me up for that any day. There is hope that a remedy is coming soon, as Olympus, Panasonic's partner in this endeavor, will unveil its Micro Four Thirds camera early next year. For now, though, it's back to the drawing board for Panasonic, and back to DSLRs for me.
Test Shots
All full-resolution shots straight from the camera with no cropping or processing.

Comments (AU Comments · US Comments)
There are currently no AU comments for this post.
The_Red_Monkey
Posted 9:43 AM 19/11/08
You took a shot from the front of the cameras but the thickness is supposed to be greatly reduced as well. How about that comparison?
The_Red_Monkey
e0ytk
Posted 9:40 AM 19/11/08
@John Mahoney:
lol, too true but I didn't want to say anything really bad about Panasonic, I always liked there tv's :P
Yeah I don't use my ist* for mush anymore and so I've begun showing her how to operate it and play with it actually.
e0ytk
jkravny
Posted 9:34 AM 19/11/08
Been waiting for this review....I still have my Nikon D70 (solid body metal :) )
And I love the shot of the Subway entrance by the museum of natural history....my 'hood
jkravny
John Mahoney
Posted 9:31 AM 19/11/08
@e0ytk: I disagree. Get your girlfriend (or any other entry level user) an entry-level Canon or Nikon (or Pentax!) DSLR with a good normal-view prime lens. You're a pro, you know how learning with solid basics is the best way to go.
John Mahoney
millardfan
Posted 9:29 AM 19/11/08
i love outside competitors!
millardfan
e0ytk
Posted 9:25 AM 19/11/08
NOt bad for someone trying to enter the photography world I guess. Something my GF could use.
Question, why leave out Pentax all the time? I use both there older ist* DSLR and the K10 and have a multitude of telephoto, adjustable and prime lens and the K10 especially is a wonderful professional camera that I use. I am a professional photographer, shot weddings, school day and High School GRaduation photos and am completely baffled by the exclussion of Pentax? I like Nikon and Canon's don't get me wrong, I've used both but I just went with Pentax in the end for pricing and the wide range of affordable and spectacular lens. k-mounts rock, lens from the 1970's and up work on both my Pentax DSLR's they're great that way.
Anways, just a question, I had, but this Panasonic is looking nice for entry level users for sure.
e0ytk
mcduff
Posted 9:18 AM 19/11/08
I also have been eagerly looking forward to this format, and while the G1 may be a transitional camera, I expect that a micro fourthirds may be in the future to augment my dslr.
mcduff
JEmlay
Posted 9:17 AM 19/11/08
Four Thirds.... does that mean this camera gives 133.33333333333%? Sounds like a trooper!!!!
JEmlay
Something4u
Posted 9:12 AM 19/11/08
Competition creates innovation. By adding in HD-Video recording ability it the G1 presents its self very well in the entry level user.
Something4u
tande04
Posted 9:04 AM 19/11/08
Yay! I've been waiting for a G1 review!
tande04
stretta
Posted 10:04 AM 19/11/08
Thanks for the review. Especially nice are the side by side shots to get an idea of the scale difference.
I wasn't going to jump out and buy the G1, but wait until the selection of micro four thirds lenses matured, then take another look, but at first blush, there doesn't seem to be much of a point. It is just slightly smaller.
I carry around a pack with not just the body, but a bunch of lenses too. If four thirds can pack the performance of some of the larger, faster telephotos lenses in a smaller form and weight, the cumulative effect of carrying around all those lenses is significant.
Anyway, filed under the 'keep an eye on things...' category
stretta
OldPunk
Posted 10:01 AM 19/11/08
The reviewer here gives the straight recommendation: "there's just no reason anyone should buy a G1". Tough words coming from the guy with Canon EOS.
There are other point of views though. The one reviewer I read for many years is DCResource.com:
[www.dcresource.com]
If you do not want to spend much time reading it (it's way longer and more detailed than review here), read the final part, section called "How Does it Compare?".
The author there is in favor of G1, and though he says that the biggest problem is price, it gives a lot of positive points and says the quality of the image is great:
"...Still, if you're willing to spend the $800 for it, you won't be disappointed: the DMC-G1 is the first camera to truly offer a "point-and-shoot experience" on an interchangeable lens camera, and thus, it earns my recommendation."
Also, I think it is too rash to point the price as the major drawback. When Canon EOS first arrived it was over $1000. Panasonic G1 has MSRP of $800, this means it will sell for $500 in just a few months (that happened with previous Lumix models). For $500, would you consider buying it?
Another comments:
- How did you shoot the ISO test pictures? Waht settings? They seem OK on DCResource.com, guess they used RAW format, did you?
-Good electronic viewfinder is actually better than live optical one. It is bigger, you can easily see with both eyes and get the additional info on the screen (like exposure, zebra, etc).
-The camera is smaller than EOS, don't depreciate this fact. This will add up when you get additional Micro Four Thirds lenses, which are smaller too. It becomes a big deal after hours of shooting.
So bottom line - I think such a heavily biased review is not fair for this new camera. Thank you anyway.
OldPunk
purple-pillows
Posted 9:48 AM 19/11/08
im sticking with the slr... d90 here i come
purple-pillows
adamrice
Posted 9:46 AM 19/11/08
The "four thirds" name does not come from any 4:3 aspect ratio, it is an admittedly arcane way of indicating the size of the sensor that "harks back to a set of standard sizes given to TV camera tubes in the 50's."
See:
[www.dpreview.com]
adamrice
gloveofpower
Posted 10:22 AM 19/11/08
This micro four thirds system is a positively brilliant concept. From the looks of this camera though, their execution was far off the mark. First off, no video capture is a colossal mistake. That is a big part of the future of digital SLRs, IMHO. Second, they must come up with a way to protect the sensor when the lens is removed. Some mechanism could be easily implemented that has a cover slide over the sensor when the lens is about to be taken off, especially with that big bulky body. And third, and most importantly, I think Panasonic missed the ENTIRE POINT: this thing is supposed to be SMALL. Like, noticeably smaller than it's full-fledged SLR brethren. It should look more like a range-finder than an SLR. Maybe they wanted to appeal to the mid-level, pseudo-serious shooters out there, but that's still no excuse. FAIL. I want to see Leica come out with their own micro 4/3 body, something small that resembles the Digilux 3 with the silver and black body. That'd be a hot number that could convince me to take the plunge with a whole new system, all new lenses, all new filters, etc. C'mon people--you got to distinguish yourself from the competition better than this if you want people to buy a whole new set of lenses!
gloveofpower
tande04
Posted 10:21 AM 19/11/08
@OldPunk: That was one of the other reviews I looked at. As was Cnet's recent review.
I look at all of them with a grain of salt. The first line of Cnet's review sums it up well,
Price is a stickler though. Like this review (and all of them) are pointing out you can get a entry level DSLR for cheaper. There are features of this one I like though. The electronic viewfinder lets you see what you shoot even with different shutter speeds and effects, point and shoot, and the swivel LCD. My dilema is do those options outweight the additional cost of a budget DSLR.
I'm still interested in the camera. One review isn't going to sway me either way. At this point I'm definatly going to wait on it for a bit. I think there are a lot of things that could cause the price to drop on it to something more reasonable. I'm sure once (if) you start seeing it in big box stores it will be below MSRP. Like you said once the video one comes out maybe this will drop.
Either way its on a wait and see list. I'm not going to go out tommorow and drop $799 on it but I'm not going to go drop $499 on a D40 tommorow either so there is plenty of wait and see time for me.
tande04
LittleJon
Posted 10:18 AM 19/11/08
@adamrice: Yes, it's a 4/3"-format sensor.
LittleJon
helfrez
Posted 10:14 AM 19/11/08
I agree with the prior poster. Review is a bit off base. Let's be honest, I don't think I have EVER read a good review on this site praising anything other than a canon or nikon. As another poster pointed out, SIDE views and weight are substantially different, also the canon looks huge too me beside the panasonic, look at the lens!
Everyone knows that all cameras are different. Try to shot liek a canon with a nikon, and you will have problems. Try to shoot like a nikon on a olympus, you're gonna have problems. It's about getting to know your machine, and how to get the best performance out of it.
I personally ended up going with a Olympus e510 (another 4/3 camera) when time came to get something else. FOR ME it gave me far better consistent and predictable performance, than the Canon xti I tested against.
Also for beginners, most of the 4/3 cameras have onboard image stabilization, rather than requiring a super expensive lense to get soem stability. I'll take those 2 free fstops anyday..check out dpreview or the likes for more in-depth analysis.
helfrez
Tony C
Posted 10:12 AM 19/11/08
Panasonic went with an SLR appearance because an unconventional style (perhaps a rangefinder camera?) didn't test well with prospective mass market buyers in Japan. It wasn't just an arbitrary decision to make it look like one of the big boys. Leave it to smaller volume shops like Olympus or Leica to bring the more avant garde camera designs to the party. Or maybe at least to allow micro four thirds to gain a small foothold in the hearts and minds of prosumer photogs before alienating them with some wild new idea of how modular cameras should be made in the future. Red anyone? Not for $2500+ into tens of thousands, sorry...
And how exactly is a camera body that is 124 mm x 84 mm x 45 mm and weighing 380 g just a "hair" smaller than your XT's 127 mm x 94 mm x 64 mm and 540 g? Sorry, but that's a very noticeable difference in size and mass to me and I'd wager that most people can even tell the difference in that side by side photo. Add to that the smaller weight and volume of micro four thirds lenses and it's a much tidier package hanging around your neck and tucked away in your camera bag.
Admittedly, yes, Panasonic has missed the boat on pricing. The G1 should have been priced to sell -- below its low-end DSLR competition's street tags just to be a safer bet. Around $600 with the kit lens would have been much more palatable. They may catch upgraders from the point and shoot crowd, but I think the bulk will be coming from superzoom owners wanting to step a toe into the DSLR world. So as not to erode that market share, Panasonic likely wanted to distance the pricing and step on their own fixed lens camera's toes. But, it should have been a tighter gap, especially since their flagship SLR-ish prosumer FZ50 can be had for around $500.
Otherwise, great review, product photos and sample shots.
Tony C
OrtonMessene
Posted 10:31 AM 19/11/08
@OldPunk: @OldPunk: The review doesn't read as biased at all, unless you're not totally smitten with the G1 before hand. I currently shoot Pentax, Nikon, Fuji and Canon DSLRs and was interested to see how this might fair having seen Sony make huge strides in the market. The drawbacks mentioned here are not trivial ones, from noise, to no substantial advantage over similarly priced Nikons or Canons with better quality and a great selection of glass, to inequities in the fundamental design (the aforementioned prism budge does seem odd as does the completely exposed sensor). All of the concerns expressed in this review would be turn offs to me were I to consider buying this 4:3 system/body. Though one aspect the reviewer didnât delve into is one which I find pretty crucial (not encumbered by the weight/sizes of lenses â working out helps I guess) and that is the quality of the body. Just look at the plastics in general. Sure itâs smaller than what Canon offers but how does it feel when youâre shooting it? Call me old fashioned but I prefer my cameras not to feel like cheap plastic vestiges of geewizz gimmicks resulting in significant compromises. Biased? Not even close.
OrtonMessene
shorty6049
Posted 10:50 AM 19/11/08
although these photos are nice and "artsy", i feel like product shots sould be of a higher aperture than f/1.4... Also, i'd probably agree that you wont think about it much, but in DSLRs, i'd say thats more than a hair different. thats like the size of a superzoom point and shoot from what i can tell. I dont like this idea of making smaller sensors in DSLRs though. Kind of defeats the purpose of the APS-C spec and full frame's low noise characteristics
shorty6049
HJTravels
Posted 11:25 AM 19/11/08
The 4/3rds system is a joke. The whole idea behind it was so they could share tech but it's not going nearly as fast as Canon or Nikon on their own. They are way behind, because they started too late on digital camreas and picked a bad starting point (4/3). Just stick with a Canon or Nikon, they are way ahead at this point. Sony is even better then anything with 4/3rds on it.
HJTravels
mconheady
Posted 11:21 AM 19/11/08
@mconheady:
not to mention the lenses seem to be half the size.
mconheady
mconheady
Posted 11:17 AM 19/11/08
smaller by a hair?
i would say it looks a lot smaller. A tiny bit goes a long way when lugging around an SLR
mconheady
shorty6049
Posted 11:10 AM 19/11/08
honestly i'm just jealous of your lens...
shorty6049
misterwho
Posted 11:29 AM 19/11/08
Kind of disappointing, but I'm impressed that Gizmodo got a review in before dpreview. Thanks, John.
misterwho
duffyanneal killed WALL-E
Posted 12:36 PM 19/11/08
@misterwho: Nah, DP is pretty slow with reviews. They are thorough and they take their time. The XSi review was the same way.
duffyanneal killed WALL-E
barjohn
Posted 2:02 PM 19/11/08
I did a personal in depth comparison between the G1 and the Nikon D90. It was a lot closer decision than this review would lead one to believe.
First, it is small, much smaller than those photos would leave you to think. In fact it was almost too small in the hand. It is also light weight with lens and battery weighing less than the D90 body only. The lens is far better and smaller than the Nikon equivalent kit lens which adds to the attraction. The reviewer says that it doesn't offer the ability to have a PIP effect for manual focusing. That is incorrect. You can get up to 16x magnification which makes manual focusing easy. That was a feature I really liked as it appeared in the viewfinder making the overall action more natural. I previously owned an M8 and this viewfinder was easier to focus with, especially on longer lens shots.
The image quality below ISO 800 was very good and nearly as good as the D90. While I didn't print the shots I would imagine that in print it would be hard to distinguish the difference. The colors are very accurate and they look good. In JPGs they were, I thought better than the D90 and much sharper looking. I had to process the RAW NEF files to beat what came out of the camera on the G1.
I had a very hard time choosing and in the end my decision in favor of the more expensive D90 was based on the larger choice of lenses including primes that I favor over zooms and the better high ISO performance of the D90 having sold my Leica precisely because I was dissatisfied with the performance above 800 ISO on the Leica.
I agree that a better form factor (more like a range finder) and the ability to use Leica primes would have swayed me to the G1, even without the higher ISO performance. I thought ISO performance above 800 was very comparable to the Leica M8's and it now sells for $6,250 for the body alone. Not bad for an $800 camera. It is far superior to the Leica D-Lux 4 that sells for $800.
barjohn
theEnemy
Posted 2:23 PM 19/11/08
@tande04: Um, Gizmodo is not the only site that reviews DSRLs.
THere are plenty G1 reviews out there since last 2 weeks ago.
theEnemy
shorty6049
Posted 2:50 PM 19/11/08
@HJTravels: as a sony shooter, i dont know if i should be offended or agree with you. I love my camera though.
shorty6049
SomeAudioGuy
Posted 3:15 PM 19/11/08
Nice overview, and thanks for the samples. I love a tilt and swivel screen, but that's not enough to keep me looking at this camera...
SomeAudioGuy
bilups
Posted 2:55 PM 19/11/08
"Micro four thirds"...because "Micro one point three three three three three three three three three three repeating of course" just doesn't roll off the tongue.
bilups
VNSROCK
Posted 4:01 PM 19/11/08
No HD video is the deal=breaker for me.
VNSROCK
tande04
Posted 4:24 PM 19/11/08
@barjohn: Thanks for your take on the camera.
tande04
tande04
Posted 4:21 PM 19/11/08
@theEnemy: Yes, and I read those. I was waiting to see giz's (and engadget's) take on the camera because they are sites I trust and enjoy.
Thanks for the update on using the internet though.
tande04
OldPunk
Posted 4:09 PM 19/11/08
@barjohn:
Thank you for your input, man! I am also considering this camera, your opinion is surely helpful.
Unfortunately people here will keep posting comments like "Thank you for the wonderful review, Gizmodo, now I know this camera is crap". Not fair.
OldPunk
TickleMeElmo
Posted 4:07 PM 19/11/08
Between the side by side comparisons and the beautiful photographs OF the G1, this article makes me really happy that I have the same Rebel XT as the author.
TickleMeElmo
Mammoth
Posted 4:44 PM 19/11/08
It's a nice little camera but the price completely ruins it.
Mammoth
thefutureisnow
Posted 4:43 PM 19/11/08
Wait a second, doesn't T-mobile already own the trademark for G1?
thefutureisnow
djangopool9
Posted 6:11 PM 19/11/08
@OldPunk:
"-Good electronic viewfinder is actually better than live optical one. It is bigger, you can easily see with both eyes and get the additional info on the screen (like exposure, zebra, etc)."
I disagree, have you ever seen an optical viewfinder specially if you have one of those fast lenses? It's bright and crystal clear! I haven't seen an EVF to top an optical. Plus that battery life would be surely be affected by using EVF. See I had a Panasonic FZ before, a prosumer using EVF and I had to carry additional 2 batteries to last for a full day of shooting. With a DSLR, I need only 1 battery for 2 to 3 days shooting, since you're not using any power while composing your shots through the optical viewfinder.
djangopool9
leandrod
Posted 8:50 PM 19/11/08
The G1 is quite smaller, a simple side-by-side shot won't show much. It is also quite lighter. But the main difference are the lenses: much better than APS-C kit lenses, smaller and lighter.
The problem with laymen reviewing cameras is that they forget interchangeable lenses cameras are actually systems that must be evaluated together.
Also, they fail to mention Four Thirds has the only dust removal system that actually works.
leandrod
markarian
Posted 9:22 PM 19/11/08
I really don't know who they're trying to fool with an $800 price tag. The person who buys this is the same person who THINKS they want an SLR. Well, at this price they'll be like "Hmm, Rebel XTi for $599, vs this camera at $799?" And like John said, it's a no-brainer.
I never cease to be amazed at how many people think their prosumer point-and shoot bridge camera is an SLR, because of the lens that protrudes and the stick-out hump that suggest a pentamirror. A lot of people will buy this camera and say "I've got me an SLR!"
markarian
geodesigner
Posted 12:27 AM 20/11/08
We'll still wait for this:
[www.dpreview.com]
geodesigner
JChristopher
Posted 12:45 AM 20/11/08
@Tony C: The "unconventional style" has been done. Remember the Olympus E-300/330? That form factor didn't last long. But those cameras were compared to the Nikon/Canon/etc. and did not measure up. Same issues that the G1 faces which is namely high-ISO performance.
Frankly I think that if a camera had the same performance at ISO 1600 that it had at ISO 100, it would sell and the form-factor would not matter one bit.
JChristopher
RogerAntilochus
Posted 12:31 AM 20/11/08
Having used both the G1 and a Rebel, hands down the G1 is the winner. Your size comparision only shows a frontal view and does not mention the pancake lens scheduled for release in early 2009. BTW, the G1 is a 12MP, not 13. The rebels body is flimsy compared to the G1 and the Rebel doesn't offer Panasonic's OIS. Add OIS to the Rebel and you are way over the MSRP of the G1. Recently it's been discovered that the G1's ISO rating are rather conservative. For example, most people are quite happy at ISO 800. In reality, when measured ISO 800 was ISO 1284. A quick scan of the message boards will find most G! owners are very satisfied, with no buyers remorse. The Rebel is a great camera to get your feet wet with, but every Rebel owner I've known soon realized that the needed / wanted to upgrade - costing them a considerable amount of money.
RogerAntilochus
ShyamalaDafoe
Posted 6:36 PM 19/11/08
i have to agree with most of that...for 8 bills, no video is ridiculous...if you don't want a DSLR, but want a few manual features, as well as video, you can get a Canon S5 IS for like, under 400 bucks and does 90 percent of what this thing does...it's only 8 MP mind you, but really, most people using a camera in this range are just gonna put the pics up on facebook anyway, not blow them up to make giant prints. i say either buy an entry level DSLR or save the dough and get an S5 or one of the lumix superzooms.
ShyamalaDafoe
JoshuaCachai
Posted 1:57 PM 19/11/08
I agree, they missed out on a lot of stuff. The intelligent auto on the G1 is the best Panasonic has ever produced and goes far beyond auto on normal cameras. You can use the manual controls if you want, but for someone that doesn't want them, IA is very smart. The flip-out screen is very useful. Other cameras have it too, but because it's missing the mirror it takes pictures using it as fast/faster then a point and shoot. Something SLR makers can't say. Lens size is controlled quite a bit by the distance between the lens and sensor. m4/3s cut that distance in half. I think as you need more lenses introduces that size and weight savings will become even more noticeable. Because of the style of focusing they use over/under focusing isn't a problem. Multiple focus points, variable size and movable are also something you can do easily with this system and some of those are impossible on typical SLRs. 4/3s also offers advantages if you like shooting with telephoto lenses. Others have covered other good parts about the camera. Certainly it's not perfect, but it's a very impressive camera for the first attempt and is only going to get better. For some users SLRs will still be the better choice, but at least we have more choice now.
JoshuaCachai
MrThunderfield
Posted 6:23 AM 20/11/08
And furthermore, remember that the Canon's kit lens has shake reduction (IS), and I'm pretty sure the Nikon's kit lens also has it.
So $800 is VERY steep for a camera like this. 300-400 would have been more suitable.
Tip to people considering buying a DSLR: Go with a real one.
MrThunderfield
WildaThersander
Posted 12:38 PM 19/11/08
You took the single picture that makes those two cameras look most alike... m4/3 isn't supposed to reduce the width of the camera, it reduces the lens diameter, lens length, and the depth of the camera body. How about a side shot of both? And what is the weight of the two? Oh really? The G1 is much lighter too? Your ONE telling picture is much like the old USSR claiming that their leaders just have a cold when they are dying/dead. You also might want to read up on actual vs real ISO testing that is revealing that the actual ISO shot is higher than panasonic's stated number before you flaunt your ISO comparison babble. If you don't want to honestly review a camera, why do it?
WildaThersander
SutapaPhineas
Posted 9:34 AM 19/11/08
Hi John, Just a couple of points. The sensor is only 12 megapixels. Panasonic made the G1 along similar lines to current DSLR to avoid confusing consumers so the reason for the size (micro four thirds can go much smaller). You forgot to explain about the dust reduction system which is the best in the business compared to the other brands. Also the noise the G1 products at higher ISO's is not far off of the Canon/Nikon camera (if you shot RAW it negates the advantage of Canon/Nikon). Video will be coming in the new year when the HD version comes out in the first quarter 09.
SutapaPhineas
loslosbaby
Posted 8:36 AM 20/11/08
I too am constantly baffled by the lack of Pentax. In terms of the "intermediate" cameras, you get weather proofing, 40 years of lens compatibility (which includes truly astounding medium-format lenses), small size, vibration reduction on ALL lenses via in-body...and, cheaper with better low-noise.
I say "hook up all those voigtlander and leica lenses to the micro-4:3 and I'm there.
I want a digital voigtlander rangefinder camera.
loslosbaby