Ben Raven: Interesting that virtually every comment, good points or no, is exclusively on the mere fact that DP is even posting this in the first place, and not on the subject of the post -- the coming(?) G5.
So, since I myself have now just commented on the comments instead of the subject. . . mea culpa,I'll take my own implicit advice and say something about the rumored G5 (Ooooh, I used the "R" word !! But at least I didn't anger the Gods by using the number that shall not be named !!)
To Panasonic, (and all the other manufacturers) --AGAIN, WITH THE NO VIEWFINDER THING !
Three incarnations ago, when I was Matthew Brady, I didn't mind looking at a screen on the back of my view camera, it was all we had. "UPSIDE DOWN LINCOLN, PLEASE TURN A LITTLE TO THE LEFT, UH, I MEAN RIGHT."
But in the ensuing lifetimes, including this one:I WANT AND NEED A DAMN VIEWFINDER !!
AND MAKE THEM CONTINUALLY MORE ADVANCED !
Get a G3 / G5, period.
ccl2003: Is the GX-1 a better option than Nikon J1 or V1? How about the G3 since they use the same sensor?
I terms of both lens range and sensor performance, it is.
Yes, G3 has the same sensor, so raw performance is the same, but there are much more to a camera then just the sensor, including ergonomics, controls and so on.
akjos: Dpreview misses some vital points. I did have nex 5n extensively, and while IQ may be SLIGHTLY better in high iso, the bulk of lenses plus lack of AF lenses period is what makes m43 stand out. Also i played with gf3 ( which suppose to slower then this GX1 )in best buy today, and i was extremely impressed by AF speed. The most atrocious thing on nex was low light AF performance. Id pick this camera ( and ill do so once i get tax refund) over nex or even new pens ( tried those too ) any day., Im excited, finally dslr quality that fits in the pocket ( with 14, 20, or 14-42x). Even with 100-300 it fits in extremely small shoulder bag. Awesome...
I think he is talking about bulk of lenses, and he is just talking about focus speed of GF3, not sensor, not jpeg, and not your neighbour's dog.
Considering officially there is 3x more comment on E-M5 then D800, despite both are breakthrough in their own way and are very good cameras, I can safely say that this would be quite a success and there are way more people care about M4/3 then Cannon FF.
Zoliapu: First of all, it is very nice to see the exciting new announcements in the different segments of photography - it reminds me to the "old good film days" when new cameras and lenses were highly awaited and discussed in the similar way.
IMO, the final limiting factor is always the photographer, not the equipment itself, so I am quite sure that this little new retro-designed camera will perfectly serve the needs of the future users.
Otherwise, size is everything in the world of photography - as it was from the beginnings, and the main drawback (for me at least) of the brave new digital world is that full frame cameras are still very expensive (for me at least), so if you change to digital, you can use EVF (the coolest development comparing to film cameras), but lost tonality and "depth" of pictures created by FF lenses. This is why I still use MF film cameras as well...
I guess no one here would doubt your point. The larger the sensor, give the same aperture, the more the depth it communciate
ogl: 17/0.95 provides the equivalent DOF really as 35/1.9 (for US$1,500 for manual focus instead of US$200 for AF). Sending its image to a poorer sensor. Absurd.
Whatever the size, if the D800 ISO6400, beat E-M5 ISO1600, I am convinced.
And this is benchmark people should use for equivalence, same size, equivalent F stop, corresponding ISO under the same light situation.
delastro: Why buy this for more than 1000 euros when I get a pana g3 for 500 euros: what has this camera more for 500 euros more?
Well, there is a lot more to a camera then the sensor, this is not news, it has been this way ever since we had the first 35mm film camera
Well 17/0.95 make 35 F2 is Full Frame performance, except you need 2 stop less ISO for an image with the same exposure.
So assuming you need to use ISO 6400 on your D800, an E-M1 user need only ISO1600.
I would imagine a E-M1 ISO1600 would definitely beat the D800, despite having a lower resolution.
M4/3 achieve it cheaper overall, in a lighter package.
thethirdcoast: Good luck shooting macro or telephoto handheld with that tiny grip.
That's what the extra handgrip module is for
Peiasdf: That's a big hump.
I actually think D800 is a better deal than E-M5 all things considered. Sure it is expensive but it is so much more capable.
yeah, like it's double the price and double the sensor size.
So some of you guys complaint about the size, some complaint about the speed.
1) this is a kit lens2) fast lens will be big3) small lens will be slow4) Olympus just announced 2 small fast prime 1/2 year ago, name another manufacturer that has another new prime selling since then
And finally, you either get a weathersealed lens first then a weathersealed camera, or the other way round. Either way, you would get one without another for some time before they introduce the other half of the weather sealed system.
d3xmeister: I hope you all do realize there is no innovation whatsoever. This is just a fisheye lens software corrected. Practically is a P&S lens with a mount. There are reasons why the ,,big boys,, are sticking with classic lens design. One is uncompromised image quality.
Also, the power zoom is ALWAYS gonna be slower and not that precise compared to mechanical zoom.
Hmmm.... another thing: Do you know the #1 reason why compact cameras aren't very reliable ? You guessed it.......it's lens mechanism failure.
And the last thing........... $400 ?????????????????????
Do you realize nothing you said make sense?
1st, there is nothing fisheye about it.2nd, it's a big sensor camera.3rd, the image quality is announced to be better then the previous standard zoom.4th, there fine if you don't like the zoom, but it has practically for video5th, based on what fact that you think this would have mechanical failure.
Hater is always gonna hate, even if they've never used the lens.
Patman888: I find it quite laughable how the M4/3 crowd puts the size of the lens before everything else. I always thought IQ and ergonomics were the most important. I guess I went to the wrong university.
If size is not an issue, may be you should just get a A77, it's a better camera with better handling and everything else.
Except the viewfinder is in the middle, rather then on the left.
It’s somewhat intriguing to me so many people are so hyped up about this. The only thing Sony did, is move the viewfinder to the left of the camera…, and removed the mirror from its SLT lines.
If you look at the low ISO sample, the colour definition is better then both the G3 and the E-PL1.
My observation is across the board, the luminance noise is better then E-PL1 and may be even better then G3.
Where it far apart is when we reach 3200, the chroma noise dominated on this sensor.
So for practical use, this is probably an improvement.