Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Panasonic G1 The first micro 4/3rds

It is smaller than my Olympus E420, luckily it's still the smallest 'DSLR' 😛.

What is your reason for getting a G1 then?
I saw that it has a 12mp sensor and it does ISO 3200.

Also another thing of note is the new sensor, this is something Olympus can use for themselves as well in their future models. It's also a shame the lenses are not a bit quicker.
 
No movie mode, no thanks. In looking for compact, carrying another device for the occasional movie doesn't cut it.
 
To me, it looks like the micro 4/3rds system would be a good choice for people looking at bridge cameras ... especially if they're already invested in a 4/3rds SLR.

I'd rather go with a m4/3 over some of those bulky Fuji or Panny bridge units or even a Canon 100IS. The m4/3 would have much more flexibility and a bigger sensor. A Canon G9 would still be more compact, so you'd have to think about it between those two.

To me, if the price is right, it's a no brainer when choosing btwn the m4/3 and a 'bulky' bridge cam. But maybe after they get a decent movie mode on it ... I'd even take m-jpeg, but AVCHD would be nice.
 
Nice, but deal killers:

- No sensor cover
- No movie mode

Although it will only reach 14mm equiv. in the foreseeable future, that could be forgiven for light travel.
 
cube said:
Nice, but deal killers:

- No sensor cover
- No movie mode

Although it will only reach 14mm equiv. in the foreseeable future, that could be forgiven for light travel.
Click to expand...

This is version 1. I'm sure down the line they will have a movie mode. From what I can gather they have been conservative with the design of this camera, people were expecting something remarkably different to a camera with a SLR.

I think the biggest deal killer is the price.
 
OK dumb question... how is this better than any of the other SLRs? I mean, it's small, but so is a D40 and it's twice the price of the Nikon. It has live view, but is it, technically, a better camera than exisiting D40s?

I'm just confused by the micro 4/3 system I think. I assumed it would be to get SLR like image quality into smaller P&S and bridge cameras, but this looks like it's trying to compete with the D40 and small Canon SLRs?
 
It's quite smaller than the E-420, which is the smallest DSLR to date. And the micro Four Thirds lenses are also smaller than Four Thirds.

It's a premium product.

The sensor is the same size, so it will compete better than Four Thirds against the other systems.
 
mrgreen4242 said:
OK dumb question... how is this better than any of the other SLRs? I mean, it's small, but so is a D40 and it's twice the price of the Nikon. It has live view, but is it, technically, a better camera than exisiting D40s?

I'm just confused by the micro 4/3 system I think. I assumed it would be to get SLR like image quality into smaller P&S and bridge cameras, but this looks like it's trying to compete with the D40 and small Canon SLRs?
Click to expand...

The point of this is to get the quality and the ability of interchangable lenses into a small compact system. Add to the fact that it will be very quiet without the mirror slap. Personally I think they should have designed something that was closer in apparence to a rangefinder.
 
mrgreen4242 said:
OK dumb question... how is this better than any of the other SLRs? I mean, it's small, but so is a D40 and it's twice the price of the Nikon. It has live view, but is it, technically, a better camera than exisiting D40s?

I'm just confused by the micro 4/3 system I think. I assumed it would be to get SLR like image quality into smaller P&S and bridge cameras, but this looks like it's trying to compete with the D40 and small Canon SLRs?
Click to expand...


I think this will have a lot of success with owners of Full Frame DSLRs who are looking for smaller cameras that have good quality. I don't think this camera is trying to replace a DSLR system. I think it will be a secondary system people buy for traveling and socal events where you don't want a huge FF camera.

It could also have success with people who are looking to get into DSLR but don't want to get something so big and complicated.
 
mrgreen4242 said:
OK dumb question... how is this better than any of the other SLRs? I mean, it's small, but so is a D40 and it's twice the price of the Nikon. It has live view, but is it, technically, a better camera than exisiting D40s?
Click to expand...

where did you see pricing? I thought pricing was going to be released next month.
 
ftaok said:
where did you see pricing? I thought pricing was going to be released next month.
Click to expand...

I saw it on Engadget. It was in Yen, which they converted to dollars. $750 body only, $1200 with the "higher end" lens kits.

I still don't get it, I suppose, but I must be misjudging its size in relation to the existing small form factor SLRs.
 
mrgreen4242 said:
I saw it on Engadget. It was in Yen, which they converted to dollars. $750 body only, $1200 with the "higher end" lens kits.

I still don't get it, I suppose, but I must be misjudging its size in relation to the existing small form factor SLRs.
Click to expand...

I think you are. But the other camera manufacturers have to innovate with something since the big camera market is basically owned by Canon and Nikon.

Think of it like this, Sigma brought out a compact with an SLR size sensor in order to innovate in the P&S market (the DP1), the camera is limited with its limited ISO and 1 focal length, but we can understand what they are doing here right? They are doing something different with P&S's. So m4/3rds comes along and they can tell Sigma in a roundabout way that they should do it their way.

Notice the price of the G1 is near the Sigma DP1, which would you choose?

Also, people on dpreview are comparing the G1 with the Canon G9, not with other SLR's like the Nikon D40.
 
mrgreen4242 said:
I saw it on Engadget. It was in Yen, which they converted to dollars. $750 body only, $1200 with the "higher end" lens kits.

I still don't get it, I suppose, but I must be misjudging its size in relation to the existing small form factor SLRs.
Click to expand...

Yikes!!!!!

I wonder what the D40 (and other SLRs) cost in Japan. I don't suppose that the D40 costs $450 in Japan, do they?

ft
 
Nice, but needs to be smaller for me to consider it. If I have to grab all new lenses then I might as well stick with the Nikon system since I already have lenses for it.

Great option for those not invested in a interchangeable lens system, but for any shooter that has Canon Nikon Sony Olympus bodies it may not be ideal.

I'd love to have that body type in a smaller Canon G9 though, along with HD movie shooting, and RAW.
 
mrgreen4242 said:
OK dumb question... how is this better than any of the other SLRs? I mean, it's small, but so is a D40 and it's twice the price of the Nikon. It has live view, but is it, technically, a better camera than exisiting D40s?

I'm just confused by the micro 4/3 system I think. I assumed it would be to get SLR like image quality into smaller P&S and bridge cameras, but this looks like it's trying to compete with the D40 and small Canon SLRs?
Click to expand...

I don't think the direct price comparison works, any more than comparing the price and specs between a MacBook Air and some ginourmous Dell laptop do. With the micro 4/3 system, I'd think you're paying a premium for the engineering that went into it.

I suspect they're still trying to create and define their niche. The 4/3 system certainly has fans, but (in my opinion) never really got small and light enough to substantially differentiate themselves from the rest of the SLR pack. Micro 4/3 probably has a better chance at doing just that. The big question is: Will micro 4/3 bring in a new wave of fans, or will it just inhabit (and maybe cannibalize) the existing 4/3 market segment?

BTW I love how the main Panasonic page that's linked above still has some "404 not found" pages linked from it. Way to get the marketing together, guys.
 
cube said:
Nice, but deal killers:

- No sensor cover
- No movie mode
Click to expand...

Not deal killers for me. 😉 I've never used video on my point and shoot.


CrackedButter said:
I think the biggest deal killer is the price.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

They took away things from their DSLR and made it less complex. No need to implement things (i.e. the mirror) that must undergo repetitive physical stresses over years of use, and yet be within a few microns of its initial starting position each time. That's what a point and shoot is, so this is essentially a point and shoot with an interchangeable lens. The price shouldn't be so high. I'd understand a slight premium over a Nikon D40 or Olympus E-420, but they're just milking this right now.
 
G1 or G10?

With regards to readers’ concerns:

Sensor cover: doesn’t this G1 have the dust-buster from Olympus which is considered one of the most effective in the industry?

Movie mode: movie mode will come in a 2009 model along with their HD lenses.

Price: I think for a new breed of camera with, what seems, a lot of work and planning put into it, it is their prerogative to give it a premium price initially, especially when first released in Japan. Initial product releases in Japan are bound to be expensive, but I have heard they are still considering what prices to give it for the US release (probably cheaper due to the recession).

I think Panasonic are aiming squarely at the ‘premium’ digital compact consumer.

Also, I wonder about the naming of it... G1! Does that mean it is going to compete with the upcoming Canon G10? There will surely be some cross-over when customers are in a store asking for recommendations. I guess G1 means : Generation 1?

Lastly, someone said this about the m4/3rds which I found quite fitting:
Isn’t m4/3rds the FF of compact cameras?
 
We have to wait to see what Olympus will come out with their version of the G1. Historically Panasonic always overpriced their camera comparing to the Olympus version. Also Panasonic-Leica lens are bigger then the Zuiko.

Here is a picture of the G1 with pancake lens

20mmF17-L.jpg
 
G1 vs E-420


Anyone not that impressed with the size of the G1? Numbers on paper don't mean anything to me, as it depends on where along the body they're measuring from. The main parts of the body that I can see appear to be nearly identical in terms of size.

It says in one part of the article HERE that they could have made the G1 smaller, but they were afraid of making it too small, particularly for American hands.

So if there's a concern about making these cameras too small, then is the E-420 as small as camera enthusiasts need them to be? That, and this mofo is 2 times more expensive than the E-420. 😕
 
That photo link didn't work for me, so I went to the article and found it. Wow, the cameras look pretty much the same to my eye. The only difference, really, is where the pentaprism/pentamirror is in the Olympus.

I'm perplexed regarding why they didn't go smaller - if they think it'd be "too small", what's the point in micro 4/3 again? 😕
 
They really missed the mark on this camera, didn't they.

And lots of FT lenses won't even AF on this new mFT camera. Hopefully Olympus' version can do it right......ALL of it. Yes, this means adding video for those who want it. That means AF using FT lenses, and this means making a camera smaller than the E-420 in a physically meaningful way rather than just "by the numbers". It has no mirror-box or prism. What are they doing with the extra space? You'd have enough space to allow users to put in another SD card if they want one, or a massive battery.

With the camera's smaller mount and size, you'd also expect fast zooms to be small in size too. Why are we still in f/3.5 to f/5.6 territory?


It just didn't hit any of the targets. It's "cute", but that's it. The only good thing about this camera is the LCD screen, which can be tilted and swivelled. Its 2x more expensive than an E-420 as well, which isn't great when you also consider how expensive the mFT lenses are.
 
bking1000 said:
Somehow, the numbers seem off to me. Look at these pics of someone actually holding the G1. It looks tiny (unless that's some giant holding the camera). http://www.flickr.com/photos/audioblog/sets/72157607245255351/ This was found by someone on dpreview.

And, if this is the "conservative" size, imagine when they decide to shrink it still more.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that thing looks Lilliputian as it is. And consider that although it's roughly equivalent to an e-420 in size and weight, it packs in a real grip and a large swivel screen.

I'm shocked they didn't just go ahead and throw a movie mode in there to begin with. Sure, it's just a matter of time until they will, but that would have removed the last hurdle for a PnS user who is considering moving up to this camera.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back