Previous news story    Next news story

Just posted: Our Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX1 in-depth review

By dpreview staff on Feb 14, 2012 at 01:43 GMT

Just posted: Our in-depth review of the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX1. As the long-awaited spiritual successor to the highly-regarded Lumix GF1, this enthusiast-oriented offering from Panasonic combines its 16MP sensor and latest touchscreen interface with a rangefinder-inspired design. The wealth of external dials and buttons speaks to the photographer who prefers to take control over camera operation and exposure settings. Is this the camera GF1 owners have been waiting for? Read our in-depth review to find out.

226
I own it
99
I want it
63
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 223
spencerberus
By spencerberus (Feb 17, 2012)

With Olympus coming out with the OM-D EM-5 shortly after the GX1, I think Panasonic needs to fast track a GX2 with weather sealing and an improved sensor with better low light capabilities (among other things, but those are the features of most interest to me) . Or they might incorporate these features into a GH3, which I think is more likely to happen, at least sooner.

0 upvotes
Keto
By Keto (Feb 18, 2012)

Panasonic have said there will be a high end m4/3 camera from them. Whereas the GX1 is for enthusiasts.

1 upvote
JLins
By JLins (Feb 15, 2012)

As a GX1 user who embraced M43 due to the available lens set and size, I find it very unfair that the photos in this review comparing the GX1 body to the NEX-7 and NX200 are shown with the original kit lens 14-42mm instead of the X zoom lens that is much smaller.

I accept the IQ having a bigger weight in the final score, but it looks to like those photos intend to hide the great size advantage of M43 to APS-C sensor cameras.

It makes the review appear partial to Sony and Samsung.

2 upvotes
OneGuy
By OneGuy (Feb 16, 2012)

Definitely. The compact powerzoom lens is a game changer. More than that, the PZ is a part of the released kit and not something to buy extra.

1 upvote
Erik00
By Erik00 (Feb 17, 2012)

I bought the GX1 with the X 14-42 Power Zoom the day before DPR´s review. Many copies of this lens has shown pronunced sharpness problems using shutter speeds between about 1/30 to 1/300 sec. as also stated in the review. Sadly my lens has exactly this problem. I hope Panasonic´s service will show responsibility.

It would have been helpfull for many buyers, if D.P.Review had revield the problem, when the lens started beeing available. They previewed the lens in august 2011 !

0 upvotes
OneGuy
By OneGuy (Feb 19, 2012)

Another site has just posted the Pana GX1 review and they show the Oly P3, GX1 and Sony NEX5N side by side:

http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Panasonic_Lumix_DMC_GX1/

0 upvotes
OneGuy
By OneGuy (Feb 15, 2012)

What ... the Pana 20mm F1.7 pancake shot up to $500 on Amazon. The last time I checked it was $350.

Who leaked the superb quality of this lens to them? You Canon guys are doing no damage here on dpr. And don't give me the excuse you were dusting off them Canon power brick G_something sensors :-)

0 upvotes
SDPharm
By SDPharm (Feb 16, 2012)

Amazon still sells the 20mm pancake at $334. There are third party vendors on Amazon selling it at much higher prices, up to $799.

0 upvotes
OneGuy
By OneGuy (Feb 16, 2012)

Okay, today's lowest new 20mm F1.7 lens price is $399 from Texas Media and the lowest *used* lens is $414 from seller 'briano__'

Yeah, the highest new 20mm F1.7 lens price is $799.95 from Wall Street Photo.

0 upvotes
danduranduran
By danduranduran (Feb 17, 2012)

Hmmmm...... I just got the Leica 25mm 1.4 and paid $509 for it. I don't think I can really go bact to my 20mm 1.7 pancake, as wonderful as it is. Maybe now's the time to sell!

0 upvotes
danduranduran
By danduranduran (Feb 17, 2012)

Seriously, I don't know why anyone would pay $400 for the 20mm 1.7 when they can get the Leica 25mm 1.4 for around $500. I mean, pancake schmancake!

0 upvotes
OneGuy
By OneGuy (Feb 19, 2012)

Geez, today's lowest new 20mm F1.7 lens price on Amazon is $495.

Looks like a volatile thing trending up.

In the dp review this lens has such a good flare rejection it does not need a hood. Don't know about Leica's 25mm perf.

0 upvotes
KassB
By KassB (Feb 21, 2012)

Its for sale from Amazon.com at $303+shipping.

Are you blind? All three of your posts have been wrong.

0 upvotes
Cax
By Cax (Feb 15, 2012)

Have a look at the face of the greek looking statue dude in the comparometer at ISO3200. Are these images correct? Maybe I am not getting the right images, because the GX1 looks a lot better than the others.

EXIF says that the GX1 is at f/6.3 and the NEX-5n is at f/8, both at 1/800. That's 2/3rds of a stop brighter light for the GX1 than for the NEX for the same amount of time. So not a valid comparison of the sensors themselves. The GX1 is fooling us by opening the aperture more.

I still believe cameras need to have their shutter speed accuracy measured, and samples taken with the same lens :/

2 upvotes
starwolfy
By starwolfy (Feb 15, 2012)

GX1 or G1X or X1 or XPro 1 or X100 or NEX or NX?

I think it should be a X

0 upvotes
alffastar
By alffastar (Feb 15, 2012)

Neither: E-M5 ;)

0 upvotes
Felix E Klee
By Felix E Klee (Feb 15, 2012)

I sometimes use a large sensor compact from Sigma: the DP1x

0 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Feb 15, 2012)

Get the XXX model, starwolfy, and chances are you won't be sorry.

0 upvotes
pacogwapo
By pacogwapo (Feb 15, 2012)

Just wait for the canon xxx

0 upvotes
ashwins
By ashwins (Feb 15, 2012)

NX20

0 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Feb 15, 2012)

You forget the Canon 1DX, their latest pro DSLR.

0 upvotes
MarcV
By MarcV (Feb 16, 2012)

How about the Oly XZ-1

0 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Feb 15, 2012)

If you buy a GX1, they will give you a free G1X.

But if you buy a G1X, you will only get one free GX1.

Which is the better way to go?

Comment edited 20 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Antony John
By Antony John (Feb 15, 2012)

Better still!
Buy either one and they give you a can of Troll Spray!

1 upvote
ccl2003
By ccl2003 (Feb 15, 2012)

Is it true that the G X Vario PZ 14-42mm lens is not that good especially on max zoom? I read somewhere that max zoom produces blurry shots. I'm seriously considering the GX1 and to be honest I have no intention of changing the lens because it will function as my daily point and shoot cam. I'm hesitating in getting a Canon 550D or 600D due to their size and I'm after the GX1 due to its size, weight and performance.

Any inputs will definitely be appreciated. Thanks!

1 upvote
rccasgar
By rccasgar (Feb 15, 2012)

Seems to, as per Dpreview review...

I'm waiting for Canon G1X, which seems to me a better option if you're not willing to change lenses...

0 upvotes
ccl2003
By ccl2003 (Feb 15, 2012)

But the G1X is too bulky for me. By the way, they're similarly priced here in Manila (GX1 w/ X lens and Canon G1X).

0 upvotes
realsand
By realsand (Feb 15, 2012)

Also consider max aperture at the telephoto end, compared with the fast 45/1.8.

1 upvote
JohnHoppy
By JohnHoppy (Feb 15, 2012)

Slrgear.com found a trace of corner softness when wide open at full extension, but otherwise a super performer. If you don't NEED a powered lens get yourself the Pany 14-45mm, it's a cracker, and if the GX1 performs as well as my G2 & GF2 (I had a GF1 as well), you won't regret it.

1 upvote
wesleywest
By wesleywest (Feb 14, 2012)

I have loved my GF1 for 18 months, and was very interested in the GX1, but yesterday ordered a NEX 5N. Although I was loathe to have to deal with larger lenses and concerned about the long-term viability of the NEX platform, I have always wanted to make some shoestring cinema and the GX1 leaves a lot to be desired. No 60p or 24p. No manual control in movie mode.

So I will be lugging around a bigger lens that may be obsolete when Sony goes bankrupt or sensor size becomes a moot point, on a camera with worse AF performance, better IQ, better VQ, manual control in movie mode, extras like Sweep Panorama, faster continous shooting, and a cheaper body price to boot.

1 upvote
AkinaC
By AkinaC (Feb 14, 2012)

Why not get GH2 instead? If you need excellent video performance...

4 upvotes
tonywong
By tonywong (Feb 15, 2012)

Get a GH-2 and add the firmware hacks for some great video.

1 upvote
micahmedia
By micahmedia (Feb 15, 2012)

gh2 = no 60p

It only has 30p in a 60i container.

0 upvotes
Joesiv
By Joesiv (Feb 15, 2012)

I wonder which camera has better resolution/detail though... hacked GH2 at 720p 60, or 5N at 1080p 60...

0 upvotes
jameshamm
By jameshamm (Feb 16, 2012)

GH2 has all kinds of hacks, some are at 1080p. The problem is that file sizes dramatically increase. As usual, there is tradeoffs.

0 upvotes
micahmedia
By micahmedia (Feb 18, 2012)

File size increases because it has the potential for more information with less loss to compression--that's not a bad thing. Just means you can't cheap out on slow cards to do it.

1080p from the 5n and 7 have been looking mighty nice to me. I'd be on either if there were more lenses to choose from.

0 upvotes
tonywong
By tonywong (Feb 14, 2012)

I picked up a GX1 for my father in January and chose one for my friend last December. They are extremely good cameras.

My dad had a GH-1 and I've got a GH-2. The GX1 performs as well as the GH-2 in most respects and is very compact as well.

I lusted over the NEX-7 for a while but I came to my senses when I remembered that the lenses will be APS-C sized as a minimum. If carry around lenses that big I'd rather lug around my 7D (or bigger), which shoots photos a lot better (in terms of moving subject AF especially) than a mirrorless system at the moment.

I think that optimized lenses with m4/3 will be the incoming sweet spot for most people in terms of optical quality, system size and sensor noise.

3 upvotes
Simon97
By Simon97 (Feb 14, 2012)

Impressive image quality. I was wondering about the 4/3rd format sensor with higher MP counts, but my concerns are at ease.

3 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Feb 14, 2012)

Wow.... This camera looks cheap-cheap-cheap. It even TALKS plastic.

Wow, where is the VIEWFINDER on this thing, Panny? I just don't see it. Surely... it must have an optical or LCD electronic or OLED electronic or.... something else for a viewfinder. Anything, anything at all?

Also, Panny, why is the LCD screen's resolution so retroactively low?

Also, how come your camera's still record interlaced video, when just about everyone else out there had switched to progressive quite a while back?

Also, Dear Panasonic, please try to come up with a new model name designation system. What they have now, nobody can figure out.

0 upvotes
BeanyPic
By BeanyPic (Feb 14, 2012)

Yep Francis. Seems like the DSLR format wins out again. Everything you've said is the foundation to why DSLR's are so damn good against these format wanna bee's :o)

6 upvotes
Button Pusher
By Button Pusher (Feb 15, 2012)

Lighten up, Francis.

2 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (Feb 15, 2012)

Where's the viewfinder? It's on the G3!

Are you having trouble figuring out the model names? It's really not hard

Gx - viewfinder SLR style cam
GHx - video optimised SLR style
GXx - Rangefinder style with optional viewfinder
GFx - Compact camera style with no viewfinder

5 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Feb 15, 2012)

If you say so, Andy. But how do you know? Reason I ask, I was just on Panasonic's Lumix camera micro site. There is nothing like what you say being mentioned there to help us make some sense of their weirdly labeled stuff. Maybe they themselves do not know of this crafty tabulation?

These Lumix-cams of theirs all look pretty much the same to me, anyhow. Too much plastic, that is readily obvious. The only one even worth the trouble looking at would be the G3. They did not rip the viewfinder out of that one, fortunately.

DMC-GH2 was okay at one time, but now it is getting to be close two 2 years old. I want something fresh, not yesteryear's hit parade star.

0 upvotes
micahmedia
By micahmedia (Feb 15, 2012)

gx1 ≠ rangefinder by any definition.

rangefinder = no mirror + framing optic with focusing aid that you look through

If anything, the G1x is closer to a rangefinder. This is an electronic viewfinder only, and the eye level finder is optional.

The NEX 7 and V1 get the viewfinder right, but none of these is really a rangefinder. 'cept maybe the X-Pro 1 and X100.

0 upvotes
HDF2
By HDF2 (Feb 15, 2012)

If you ever bothered to read the reviews of the products you attempt to disparage you might save yourself looking silly and people might actually try and take you seriously.

You seem obsessed with saying that all of the Panasonics are cheap and plastic, when it is clear you have never held one nor read the review.

From the review you have not read "What's not evident in the images above is just how much more heft the GX1 has in comparison to the NX200. With a solid metal body construction that weighs in at nearly 320g without a lens, the GX1 feels in hand rather substantial... "

2 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Feb 15, 2012)

Where are you getting your information from, HDF2? No Panasonic Lumix cameras I know of have a "solid metal construction," let alone one that you can FEEL while holding the body in your hands. And just how much "metal" can you put into a 320 gram anything, huh?

@ miacahmedia: Canon G1 X indeed has a mirror-less rangefinder style optical VF. Many of the Canikon mirrorless cameras have that, too. It's not a bad way to compose the shot, but of course it's not good for much else. Most of the old 8mm, Super 8, and even 16mm film cameras had that, not to mention the photo cams of all film formats.

0 upvotes
HDF2
By HDF2 (Feb 15, 2012)

Francis, have you bothered to read the review?

I thought not.

That quote in my last message was from the DPReview you have not even bothered to read.

I have also seen and used the GX1, and yes, it is a metal based body, not plastic. I repeat, read the review, handle the camera and then come back and post sensible commentary instead of uninformed and spurious dribble.

Comment edited 14 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
klopus
By klopus (Feb 15, 2012)

@Francis: "Wow.... This camera looks cheap-cheap-cheap. It even TALKS plastic"

You seem to be in some kind of the trollish fit. Did you read DPR review, the part where they talk about build quality, what it's made from? Did you handle the camera in person yourself to justify such blanket and utterly stupid statements? I did hold it at B&H (and I also have GF1). It's an extremely well built mostly metal camera which TALKS metal and quality construction. Shish.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
klopus
By klopus (Feb 16, 2012)

@Francis: "No Panasonic Lumix cameras I know of have a "solid metal construction," let alone one that you can FEEL while holding the body in your hands. And just how much "metal" can you put into a 320 gram anything, huh?"

How many Pana cameras you handled yourself as opposed you "know of"? I have GF1 and it's shell is fully made of metal. Not plastic, nice hefty solid metal that gets cold to the touch! 320 g is pretty hefty for such small cameras as GF1 and GX1. Now if you don't believe me open DPR review (GF1 or GX1), open the section where they talk about construction and read. Then come back. Thank you!

2 upvotes
Marla2008
By Marla2008 (Feb 17, 2012)

You gotta be kidding... I'm a D700 owner and my GX-1 screams quality, it's an extremely well built camera with superb finish.
By the way, it's also so good in IQ I don't plan on shooting my DSLRs anymore.

1 upvote
cesaregal
By cesaregal (Feb 14, 2012)

Good results at high ISO, good Jpeg but no built-in viewfinder.
GH3 will be complete.

0 upvotes
NowHearThis
By NowHearThis (Feb 14, 2012)

except it won't be pocketable. Damn.

1 upvote
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (Feb 15, 2012)

Yeah but the GH3 will cost a lot more, perhaps the G5 will bring the improvements in the GX line back to the G line.

0 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Feb 15, 2012)

Exactly right. The overall best camera is always the one that does not even exist. Like these one that you folks are talking about.

0 upvotes
cesaregal
By cesaregal (Feb 15, 2012)

GX1 can be your best camera if you needn't a viewfinder.
I'm waiting for similar improvement (hight ISO results) on the GH2.

0 upvotes
MarcMedios
By MarcMedios (Feb 14, 2012)

All things being equal, I think I would buy a Canon G1 rather than this camera. The lack of viewfinder on what is supposed to be an almost-DSLR camera is troubling

4 upvotes
pannumon
By pannumon (Feb 14, 2012)

Panasonic also offers cameras with a viewfinder, you know? How about Panasonic Lumix G3? It's pretty much similar and has been available for some time already.

11 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Feb 15, 2012)

Canon G1 X comes with a Canon lens. The Panny models do not, unless you get the kit lens package.

Also, the sensor on the Canon model being mentioned is significantly larger than what you will find in any of these Lumixes.

Finally, the Canon G1 X comes with an optical viewfinder as part of its price. The Panny Lumix-cams do not.

0 upvotes
micahmedia
By micahmedia (Feb 15, 2012)

The G and GH Pannys are more like mirrorless DSLR-like cameras. This cam is supposed to resemble something more compact, like a Leica. It resembles it, but misses the function. I agree--there should be more offerings built like the Nex 7, X Pro1, and X100, where you can hold it up to your face, unlike the bleeding annoying arms length idiot squint you see with the LCD only deals.

1 upvote
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Feb 15, 2012)

Panasonic Lumix line-up has about 2x as many camera models that they would really need to make a dent. They themselves cannot explain clearly which series and models are intended for what particular target group and use.

0 upvotes
Mtsuoka
By Mtsuoka (Feb 14, 2012)

I think this can be a nice "second camera" for DSLR users
On the other hand, I think the OMD is quite pointless, given it's size (with the 12-50 lens)

Comment edited 10 seconds after posting
1 upvote
T3
By T3 (Feb 14, 2012)

I think DSLR users generally like having a viewfinder so they can put the camera to their face. I know I do! That actually makes the OMD more attractive to DSLR users, since it has a built-in viewfinder. You can buy an EVF for the GX1, the Panasonic LVF2 electronic viewfinder, but the camera ends up being the same size (or larger) than an OMD, and costs nearly the same. But with the LVF2 viewfinder, you lose the ability to use the hotshoe, whereas the OMD allows you to still use the hotshoe because there's no need to add an accessory EVF.

Also, with regards to the Oly 12-50 lens, keep in mind that the whole point of using an interchangeable lens camera is that you can put any lens you want on it. It doesn't have to only be the Oly 12-50.

Comment edited 37 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Feb 14, 2012)

How bad DSLR cameras have gotta be, when just about every other camera reviewed here are slated to be a "second camera to a DSLR" or a "back-up camera."

0 upvotes
Menneisyys
By Menneisyys (Feb 14, 2012)

"Also, with regards to the Oly 12-50 lens, keep in mind that the whole point of using an interchangeable lens camera is that you can put any lens you want on it. It doesn't have to only be the Oly 12-50."

Also note that, according to Pekka Potka's review, the 12-50, IQ-wise, is nothing to write home about. Even Pana's 14-45 kit lens is WAY better.

1 upvote
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Feb 14, 2012)

Zoom lenses for Micro 4/3 form factor cameras are pretty dreadful still. Maybe one day?

0 upvotes
Mtsuoka
By Mtsuoka (Feb 15, 2012)

@ Francis Carver
"How bad DSLR cameras have gotta be, when just about every other camera reviewed here are slated to be a "second camera to a DSLR" or a "back-up camera.""

think it the other way round, maybe these mirrorless camera is not capable of being the "prime camera" for some (not all) photographers, which I think is very reasonable

just because you are a fanboy of something doesn't mean others have to follow

Comment edited 19 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Mtsuoka
By Mtsuoka (Feb 15, 2012)

@T3
"Also, with regards to the Oly 12-50 lens, keep in mind that the whole point of using an interchangeable lens camera is that you can put any lens you want on it. It doesn't have to only be the Oly 12-50."

thanks for pointing out the obvious

Comment edited 13 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Feb 15, 2012)

@ Mtsuoka: If you always have to run around with your "primary camera" and with your "secondary camera," to me that means that (A) your primary camera is not too hot, or (B) your secondary camera is questionable, or (C) by getting at least one of these two cameras you realized you had made a mistake.

If you have one good camera -- why would you really need a second best?

0 upvotes
klopus
By klopus (Feb 15, 2012)

@ Francis: "Zoom lenses for Micro 4/3 form factor cameras are pretty dreadful still. Maybe one day?"

Says who and compared to what? Every optical test of Pana's kit 14-42/45 I saw is favorable and palces them at the top of the class. Same for 55-200.

0 upvotes
ChrisKramer1
By ChrisKramer1 (Feb 14, 2012)

Yawn. Yet another M4/3 review. I haven't read it yet, but I know that it is going to be exactly the same as the others. How is it that such an unpopular system can hog all the review space? Is the Samsung NX200 ever going to get a look in?

2 upvotes
HDF2
By HDF2 (Feb 14, 2012)

Thank you for your insightful contribution - DPReview readers are now so much more informed thanks to you generously taking the time from your busy schedule to share your knowledge with us.

15 upvotes
NowHearThis
By NowHearThis (Feb 14, 2012)

http://www.43rumors.com/impressive-in-japan-mirrorless-suprasses-dslr-amrket-share-olympus-to-catch-up-with-nikoncanon/

Thank you for your opinion. But M/43 is not an unpopular system. Also m/43 isn't hogging up the review space. You should check your facts before posting. Here is the last 14 reviews:
• Panasonic GX1
• Nikon V1/J1
• Canon S100
• Sony NEX-7
• Olympus E-PM1
• Sony A65
• Sony A77
• Sony HX100V
• Sony NEX-5n
• Sony A35
• Olympus E-PL3
• Panasonic FH7
• Sony NEX-C3
• Olympus E-P3

Sony products are 7 of the last 14 reviews and combining both Olympus and panasonic - M4/3 only has 4 reviews out of the last 14.

Yes, the NX200 is over due for a review, but rather than spouting some negativity here, why not write to Samsung and tell them to get a camera to DPR to be tested. Or go do your own research instead.

10 upvotes
NowHearThis
By NowHearThis (Feb 14, 2012)

Here's your NX200 reviews.
http://www.engadget.com/2011/12/13/samsung-nx200-interchangeable-lens-camera-review/

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2399824,00.asp

http://www.techradar.com/reviews/cameras-and-camcorders/cameras/digital-slrs-hybrids/samsung-nx200-1048835/review

http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/samsung_nx200_review/

http://www.trustedreviews.com/samsung-nx200-review_Digital-Camera_review

1 upvote
slncezgsi
By slncezgsi (Feb 14, 2012)

Chris, m4/3 has by far the most complete lens lineup including several very good primes that can be had for reasonable money. To those actually taking photos with their cameras this may be of some importance ...

7 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Feb 14, 2012)

First of all, it doesn't appear that the m4/3 system is as "unpopular" as you think it is. Secondly, what the heck is an NX200? Maybe it's a camera from an unpopular system, that's why I am unfamiliar with it. LOL.

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting
4 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Feb 14, 2012)

"m4/3 has by far the most complete lens lineup."

Yes, indeed. More complete than say the Nikon 1-series lens line-up or the Pentax Q camera's lens line-up. Some great looking M4/3 primes can be had now -- especially once you leave the restrictive confines of the Panasonic and Olympus brands. No good zooms as of yet.

0 upvotes
tonywong
By tonywong (Feb 14, 2012)

If you mean 'unpopular' because of all the negative comments here, I'd suggest there's quite a few fans and detractors trying to figure out which system is "best."

Otherwise implying that only reviewing systems with significant marketshare (which m4/3 does have) is a bit contradictory to asking for a Samsung NX review.

0 upvotes
QuarterToDoom
By QuarterToDoom (Feb 16, 2012)

Looking at the photos on your gallery m43 has a long ways to go before your skills can match its features.

0 upvotes
645D
By 645D (Feb 14, 2012)

No external mic input? A major con for serious video shooters:-(

2 upvotes
cleverinstigator
By cleverinstigator (Feb 14, 2012)

A serious video shooter would not use a digital camera they would use a video camera...

10 upvotes
don_van_vliet
By don_van_vliet (Feb 14, 2012)

Seems a slightly naive comment, given that DSLRs and mirrorless have been used professionally to shoot video.

4 upvotes
mister_roboto
By mister_roboto (Feb 14, 2012)

You want a GH-2 or a future GH-3

4 upvotes
bobbarber
By bobbarber (Feb 14, 2012)

You know, I thought that about my G2 when I bought it, except that it has an external mike input! (haven't tried it yet, but it's there, labeled mike)

Seriously, I thought that serious video shooters used audio systems that were not even part of the camera. it is easy to record much better sound than any of these cameras with my $99 Olympus voice recorder, and line up the video and audio tracks in post-processing. I even use free software. I fail to see the advantage of these horrendous, bulbous-looking things that people stick on the top of their cameras to record video.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 47 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
645D
By 645D (Feb 14, 2012)

Didn't we see how many 5D2, a digital camera, were used in video production?

1 upvote
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Feb 14, 2012)

what you want is too much for a cheap entry-level camera, may be.

0 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Feb 14, 2012)

Obviously, just about nobody commenting here knows much about external microphones, external audio recorders, and the need for at least an unbalanced external audio input jack on a camera.

0 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Feb 14, 2012)

@cleverinstigator - No, a serious video shooter would get a DSLR. Every wedding videographer I've worked with in the last year or two has been using a DSLR to shoot their video. Many of these videographers ditched their video cameras in favor of video DSLRs. So the adage "serious video shooters would use a video camera" is a bit out-dated and not reflective of what's going on among serious video shooters.

2 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (Feb 15, 2012)

Not as big as the lack of any manual controls! Maybe tester13 etc. can get a firmware hack out for it

0 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Feb 15, 2012)

I agree fully w. you, T3. On the other hand, cleverinstigator and his/her fan club members has obviously no clue what real-life videographers use for equipment these days.

0 upvotes
kkardster
By kkardster (Feb 14, 2012)

Stupid newbie question: Why is the lens diameter so much wider than the glass diameter? It seems out-of-proportion from what I'm used to seeing.

0 upvotes
morganb
By morganb (Feb 14, 2012)

its a cropped sensor. you are used to seeing lenses related to a 35mm equivalent (a full frame sensor)

0 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (Feb 14, 2012)

electronic aperture controls and focus motor need to fit around the lens elements in pancake lenses, and zoom lenses need space for the zoom linkages etc.

3 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Feb 14, 2012)

In other words, dear kkardster -- we just don't know.

0 upvotes
flipmac
By flipmac (Feb 14, 2012)

In addition to Andy's comment, the lenses may also need space for optical stabilization and zoom motor (for the X zoom).

Anyway, it isn't like the barrel is unnecessarily wider than the mount. I suppose the barel could taper just like the 45/1.8.

0 upvotes
chrohrs
By chrohrs (Feb 14, 2012)

I've been using a GX1 since December, and it is indeed a fine camera. The camera feels solid, and the IQ and AF are just great. Plus I'm really impressed by the selection of high-quality, small MFT lenses. I like the combo so much that I sold off all my Canon SLR gear.

My only complaint is the inability to stop down during video. Shooting wide open with primes can be challenging because there's so little DoF. In fact, I ended up getting the slower 14-42 power zoom just for video. (More discussion at http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1075963.) My guess is that Panasonic could change this with firmware, but they're protecting the GH2.

Still, I really love this camera. Don't let the small size fool you; it's a serious machine.

3 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Feb 14, 2012)

Sort of looks like a toy to me. Especially compred to something like the new Olympus E-M5. That ones does not look like a toy-cam, actually.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Alan Wolf
By Alan Wolf (Feb 16, 2012)

I’ve found my GF1 to be the first digital camera I’ve really enjoyed using. I still use my Canon 5 mk II for very limited outings; and yes, there is a quality difference—but it is not as noticeable as you would think, unless the lighting is tricky. And overall, I would rate the Panasonic lenses better than the Canon L glass. (But then, one of the things I love most about the GF1 (and I will most likely get the GX1) is the way it mates with Leitz glass.) This line of cameras is very solid, and very responsive, with great RAW quality.

0 upvotes
bigrig
By bigrig (Feb 18, 2012)

From the review:
"Interestingly, the only method of manual aperture control is found by activating the automated intelligent Auto (iA) mode. By dragging a 'defocus' slider while filming, you can control the depth of field beyond your area of focus."

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Feb 14, 2012)

> sdyue,

a simple rule that solves all the equivalent calculations is to use sqrt(sensor-area-ratio) as a factor for both focal length and f-number, like

Pana PZ 14-42/3.5-5.6 ------> 27.4-82.3/6.9-11.0 equiv.
Canon G1 X (15.1-60.4/2.8-5.8) ------> 28-112/5.1-10.5 equiv.
Sony E18-55/3.5-5.6 ------> 27.6-84.4/5.4-8.6 equiv.

so G1 X is the fastest/brightest one (lower noise, shallower field) at 28mm FOV with an equivallent f-number of f/5.1 (not fast/bright at all in 35mm FF standard) .

the "equivallent f-number" is really the aperture size at a given FOV,
which determines everything f-number does like SNR (shot noise) or DOF for instant comparison across different formats.

Comment edited 4 times, last edit 10 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
CDMc
By CDMc (Feb 14, 2012)

If only!

I'm starting to get fed-up with all this. the equivalent aperture does not determine everything - exposure triangle is still ISO-Aperture-Shutter Speed, the aperture is the actual none of this equivalent nonsense. equivalence is fine for DOF, but that's it

hope this helps

1 upvote
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Feb 15, 2012)

the "exposure" you are talking about is per area calculation which does not translates straight forward into IQ for different sensor formats.

exactly the same thing happened for films, that the same film at the same exposure will result different IQs on different formats.

you can do experiments to test what I said that the equivalent f-number determines everything exactly the same a real f-number does on 35mm FF (set ISO to auto or appropriately for the same shutter speed, and compare SNR to see if they are the same at a given equivalent f-number, good enough results from 35mm FF down to 1/2.3" using a same lens like a Nikon or Pentax 50/1.4).

0 upvotes
eivissa1
By eivissa1 (Feb 14, 2012)

I wonder if I would swap the GX1 for my LX5, since the LX6 or 7 is coming this year. Difference in price between the two is more or less marginal. The LX6 will become in a strange postion, unless the price will down to 400 euro. Wait for the LX6, and hope that the improvements to the LX5 are massive (which I don't believe), or buy the GX1?
Someone else in this situation?

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
M1963
By M1963 (Feb 14, 2012)

The GX1 will give you two things you'll never get with the LX: a large sensor and interchangeable lenses. Either are a substiantial advantage in image quality. It's up to you to decide what you praise the most: convenience or image quality.
For me it's a no-brainer.

5 upvotes
ZAnton
By ZAnton (Feb 14, 2012)

There is no 24-90 f/2,0-3,3 lens for GX. And it never will. You get larger sensor with all advantages killed by crap kit-lenses. Yes you can buy Voigtlander 0.95, 17 f/2.8, this or that, but calculate then the total price of such combination. It will be waaaay over 400 Euros.

0 upvotes
morganb
By morganb (Feb 14, 2012)

you could also just wait and see what Canon's mirrorless offering will be. from what i have been told it should be around july/august and cost $800-$900. i'd also expect a APS-C sensor but i could see them sticking with the sensor from the G1X.

0 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Feb 14, 2012)

Nobody I know is waiting around for anything from Canon. Their product announcements are basically worthless as of late. Anyhow, they already have their premium mirrorles camera. It's called the G1 X.

0 upvotes
morganb
By morganb (Feb 15, 2012)

+Francis Carver, its best to take these kind of things worth a grain of salt but that is what canon told me. the G1X is still their P&S offering. they will have a MILC this summer.

0 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Feb 15, 2012)

@ morganb: Canon might not know this, but you can actually get a P&S with a superzoom optic for well less than half the price of the $800 Canon G1 X.

For me, the CANON brand name plastered on any camera is worth about two walnuts and an apple as a surcharge.

By the time Canon releases a mirrorless IL camera, everyobody out there who had ever wanted to get one would have gotten one. Canon is too little too late to the table, and as usual, at too pricey of a price.

How many EOS C300s will this company sell for $16,000 a pop, you think?

0 upvotes
SteveNunez
By SteveNunez (Feb 14, 2012)

It seems strange how certain cameras are leap-frogged over others in relationship to when they're reviewed...the NX 200 and Pentax Q have yet to be reviewed and their "preview" has been out for some time yet this Panasonic gets announced and reviewed almost immediately- kinda makes you wonder why this is so?

2 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (Feb 14, 2012)

The GX1 was announced and previewed 3 months ago, that's not exactly "almost immediately" tho many cameras have clearly fallen by the wayside in terms of their reviews

6 upvotes
SteveNunez
By SteveNunez (Feb 14, 2012)

Andy true but look at when the Q and NX200 were "previewed" and yet neither has a full review up?

0 upvotes
SteveNunez
By SteveNunez (Feb 14, 2012)

My guess is that some cameras are given priority based on estimated interest levels and others are pushed back due to lesser interest.....I'm sure there are other factors at play, but some reviews are taking very long to materialize.

2 upvotes
elotorero
By elotorero (Feb 15, 2012)

its probably just interest and demand, unfortunately for the NX and Q. The GX1 has seen more demand for a review since it is the 'spiritual' successor of the GF1 which many still use and many are looking to replace.

there may be other factors in play which we could all assume thing into. but basically websites cater to 'popular' demand also rather than which looks logical to them because visits = revenue.... lets hope for more aps-c MILC reviews in the future

2 upvotes
topstuff
By topstuff (Feb 14, 2012)

DPR seem to have marked the camera down because of its relative position in a more crowded market compared to , for example, the NEX range.

I think the thinking from DPR is a bit muddled here. Perhaps they spend too much time with the camera on a test rig rather than out in the field.

As a NEX5N user, I recognise that while the sensor quality is high and potential IQ is great, the effectiveness of the camera for mixed, family use ( surely its primary role ) is negated by its relatively poor AF and weak lens selection.

M4/3 does not seem to have the same weaknesses - with this Panny and the new Olympus EP3 having much better AF than the NEX and a larger choice of lenses.

Therefore, when weighting these factors, I find it hard to reconcile how the Panny is "marked down" compared to the NEX.

NEX5N does not deserve GOLD while the GX-1 gets Silver IMO. They each have advantages and disadvantages that neutralise each other and IMO should have the same score.

17 upvotes
sibyy
By sibyy (Feb 14, 2012)

Very fair comment.

And so is the overall size of the NEX system against M4/3. People who go for mirrorless cameras do so for their size, otherwise DSLRs offer better value for money.

0 upvotes
Revenant
By Revenant (Feb 14, 2012)

DPR gives much more weight to IQ than other factors, as is explained here:
http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Guides/dpreview_scores_and_ratings_01.htm
They also write that if one disagrees with their weighting, one should disregard the final score, and instead draw one's own conclusions from the actual review. Likewise, they explain that the gold/silver awards are highly personal and subjective, and not necessarily connected to the score.

8 upvotes
Steve Wilson
By Steve Wilson (Feb 14, 2012)

Overweighting IQ in the score is okay if the comparison is made between identical sensor sizes, but it makes no sense to score camera A lower because it has a smaller sensor than camera B. If we are going down this path, we might as well score compact cameras in the 30s and FF cameras in the 70s.

7 upvotes
Jonathan F/2
By Jonathan F/2 (Feb 14, 2012)

If that's the case, NEX should be marked down for lack of lenses.

2 upvotes
Howard Prendergast
By Howard Prendergast (Feb 14, 2012)

Good point "topstuff" on the camera review highlighting certain points and not considering some real world usage data. Noone is perfect however.

I am of the feeling that reviews are just a guide and the evaluation should be left up to the potential buyer. Of course this requires a bit of independent thinking which I realize not everybody shows. I rarely buy according to the top pick in the review but go according to what I prefer in a camera. I admittedly also favour certain brands, usually as a result of familiarity and reputation and not always because of the specs. (The competition is so hot and heavy that there are always a few worthy products in every category)

I have found the DPR reviews very helpful but I do talk with friends, visit the manufacturer's website and go pick up the camera at a camera store before buying. That way I can't just blame DPR when I make a bad pick, I get to blame everyone else......... Except me! LOL

2 upvotes
Nerkdergler
By Nerkdergler (Feb 15, 2012)

As a consumer, nobody's forcing you to buy the 79% camera over the 78% camera. It's just one reviewer's weighting of test results. DPR make no bones about it, and they explain their weighting choices.

I find the DPR reviews very useful, but to be honest the rating out of 100 at the end is the least useful part. In the end you make a personal decision based on what features are important to you.

If I were a manufacturer rep, on the other hand, I expect I'd want to lobby long and hard for weighting that plays to my system's strengths.

0 upvotes
DaveMarx
By DaveMarx (Feb 15, 2012)

"As a consumer, nobody's forcing you to buy the 79% camera over the 78% camera." Correct, and those who compile numeric score-based ratings often remind us that a difference of a point or two can be meaningless. I think the real issue here is the value of a review as validation of a personal choice. "The expert agrees with me," vs. "the expert doesn't agree." Will folks look upon you as more serious or discerning if you pull out one camera vs. another? Yes. Most of us care about playground politics.

It'd be interesting to have an interactive review grid where readers can see the reviewer's rating of each feature's execution, and the weighting factor applied to that feature. Then, let the readers apply their own weighting factors. Display the reviewer's total score, the individual's score, and the average of all readers' scores. The results might be very instructive.

1 upvote
Parappaman
By Parappaman (Feb 14, 2012)

The NX200 is consistently quoted throughout the review as a strong competitor.
It's time to let that camera's review loose, don't you think? :)

9 upvotes
oluv
By oluv (Feb 14, 2012)

What about the issues of the 14-42 powerzoom? Is there a chance to hear some statement from Panasonic?
I looked forward to this lens so much, but when i tried it in a store lately, I also noticed it to be extremly unsharp @42mm. Interestingly it was even softer than my 14-140 at all focal lenghts i have tried.
I wonder if this is the price you have to pay due to minaturization, or are there some quality issues involved?

I would really like dpreview to follow this problem and keep us informed!

2 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Feb 14, 2012)

they sell the powerzoom at a premium, not the glasses.

1 upvote
M1963
By M1963 (Feb 14, 2012)

This camera will be trounced by the Oly E-M5 in every respect.

3 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (Feb 14, 2012)

Apart from

1) Size
2) Price
3) Internal flash

5 upvotes
M1963
By M1963 (Feb 14, 2012)

Easily compensated by:
1) IBIS
2) Integrated viewfinder
3) Better JPEG engine
4) Better design
5) Optional battery grip
6) Flash bundled with the camera
7) Better kit lenses
8) Being an Olympus

4 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Feb 14, 2012)

Seems highly unlikely since they have the same sensor. They will have virtually the same image quality.

1 upvote
M1963
By M1963 (Feb 14, 2012)

Olympus claim the sensor is brand new (which I find unlikely, as Oly is contractually bound to use Panasonic's previous gen sensors). It is also said that the E-M5 has a smoother anti-aliasing filter which, if true, might mean better resolution.

1 upvote
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (Feb 14, 2012)

@M1963 Yes but as I've proven it's not better "in every respect". For some people the features of the E-M5 make it a better choice for them, for others the GX1 or E-P3 better suites their needs.

1 upvote
M1963
By M1963 (Feb 14, 2012)

Andy, I don't mean to start an argument, but what exactly have you proved? Buy an external EVF for the Panasonic, and the size and price advantage will vanish. The integrated flash is, as far as I know, GN10. Weak. You'll need an external one on either camera for serious use. I don't mean to be dismissive about the GX1; it's just that I find the E-M5 to be quite an achievement - once it lives up to its promise. Would I buy it to replace my E-P1? Not so sure...

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (Feb 14, 2012)

@M1963 you can't just come in here and post a trolling comment like "This camera will be trounced by the Oly E-M5 in every respect" then get defensive when someone lists why that's not true.

0 upvotes
M1963
By M1963 (Feb 14, 2012)

Checked the web and found that 'trolling' means one's looking for negative responses or posting things because he wants to get a rise out of others or make them mad. That's false.
I just expressed an opinion. You replied with a reasoning that's not valid, IMO, and I responded. That's all. I'm not being defensive - and certainly not trolling
Andy, I've seen the photos at your gallery. No insult intended, but you seem to be what people call a 'gearhead'. You care about ISO, I'm interested in photography. We sit on different sides of the fence. You care about specs, I crave for image quality first and foremost. That's why I have an Olympus and you own a Panasonic.
Trolling? For God's sake...!
Anyway, you shouldn't worry: this little argument will be forgotten by tomorrow morning. A new review will appear and nobody will remember this one, or these comments.

0 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (Feb 14, 2012)

@M1963 well do be a bit more careful with netiquette to avoid being mistaken for a troll, as your post could be read as "lol gx1 sux" :)

As for being a gearhead I do like a good technical discussion on these forums so all my gallery uploads are currently tests I've done to illustrate things I'm posting about, it doesn't really extend into my actual photography beyond pushing the camera to get results I like.

Actually that reminds me I've been meaning to start uploading real photos to the DPR galleries, so much to do so little time :)

1 upvote
micahmedia
By micahmedia (Feb 15, 2012)

I happen to agree with m1963 here. Panny dropped the ball on this one. This model should replace the G3 line and include an EVF. They put a crappy LCD on it and it's priced too high for what it offers. This is spec-ed, except for sensor, to compete with the E-PL series, and does so meagerly. Did they cheap out and bank on hackability? Sure seems like it.

And lack of an internal flash is a selling point in my book. Who wants something that can zap you in the face if it gets soaked?

0 upvotes
Martin_PTA
By Martin_PTA (Feb 14, 2012)

I think a 460kdot display is a bit marginal for a camera without a native viewfinder and a $800 kit price tag!

7 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Feb 14, 2012)

this is only an entry level camera and the price will drop for sure.

1 upvote
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (Feb 14, 2012)

Entry level? The GF3 is entry level, this is very much equal to or even above the G3. The display is good enough, but definitely could be better.

2 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Feb 14, 2012)

then G3 is entry-entry level. Oly and Pana have the tradition to sell low cost cameras and lenses at an unreasonable premium and Sony is following the suit. but expect the prices of cameras halved though.

0 upvotes
digifan
By digifan (Feb 14, 2012)

Gx1 is better build than the G3. The GX1 is metal, the G3 plastic, GX1 has more controls than the G3.

1 upvote
historianx
By historianx (Feb 15, 2012)

GX1 Made in Japan, G3 Made in China. The poster that claimed the GX1 as "plasticky" and "cheap" needs to quit huffing the glue.

1 upvote
zldream
By zldream (Feb 14, 2012)

GOOD JOB,panny!
GOOD JOB,dpr!

1 upvote
Steve Wilson
By Steve Wilson (Feb 14, 2012)

I have the impression from reading the conclusion that the GX1 was not given a Gold rating because the sensor is mu43 rather than APS-C and has slightly more noise at very high ISO. If this is part of the reason the camera failed to achieve a higher score, I think it is a very bad reason indeed.

It is useful (and good) to compare cameras with different sensor sizes, but to ding a smaller sensor because it doesn't offer the same noise and resolution quality as a larger sensor makes no sense at all. If the GX1 is penalized vs. the NEX because the of very high ISO image quality, then I also expect the NEX review to be equally penalized because telephoto lenses (if they even had one) are larger for an equivalent focal length. Or penalize the NEX because the DOF is shallower for a given angle of view.

There are full frame DSLRs that are the same physical size as their APS DSLRs. Everyone knows the IQ is different, but that hardly makes APS less desirable.

5 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (Feb 14, 2012)

It's nothing to do with the size of the sensor, more the fact that you can get identically sized and priced cameras that have slightly better image quality. The fact these cameras have APS sensors makes no difference.

10 upvotes
zodiacfml
By zodiacfml (Feb 14, 2012)

It is because of the similar body size and price. The NEX 5n is even cheaper. Buying just the body of the 5n and a pancake would put it in similar size. Besides, if you like the the GX1 you'd get it regardless of the award or score given to it since it is the best m4/3 out there.

2 upvotes
iudex
By iudex (Feb 14, 2012)

What do you suggest? Comparing mirrorless cameras strictly within sensor size? In this way there would be only compasiron between Oly and Pana CSC´s, because only this producers have M 4/3 sensor cameras. And what would you compare the Nikon 1 to? ;-) There is only one camera with CX sensor, so how to compare it? Is the comparison of J1/V1 with M4/3 cameras unjust, because M4/3 cameras have big advantage of bigger sensor?

2 upvotes
DaveMarx
By DaveMarx (Feb 14, 2012)

It's frustrating when a particular product line, with an appealing line-up of features, seems to be doomed to come in second forever, due, apparently, to one particular, immutable characteristic. Bigger negatives/image sensors will always be better, but the weight given to noise performance may overstate its importance, considering the current state of the art. Anyone remember what Tri-X looked like when push-processed to 1600? "Slightly better image quality at the same size and price" is pretty simplistic considering all the possible criteria. Change the weightings, give weight to the previously unmeasured, and the balance may well tilt differently.

There's a natural tendency to give greater weight to objective measurements. How much weight do you give to EVF vs. no EVF, external microphone connector vs. none? A deal-breaker for me may be meaningless to another. Everyone benefits from better image quality, so you can't go wrong giving it lots of weight, right? Not always.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
7 upvotes
sibyy
By sibyy (Feb 14, 2012)

There is a lot of weight placed here on the final score or whether a camera gets a Silver or Gold rating. I think it's more valuable to read the whole x pages of the review and each can make up his own mind based on personal priorities.

Personally I go for M4/3 over NEX.

3 upvotes
Steve Wilson
By Steve Wilson (Feb 14, 2012)

@iudex:
It is good to compare cameras of different sensor size and similar physical size, but what I am suggesting is that the final score should be not be penalized just because a camera has a smaller sensor for a given body size. For example, some compact cameras like the Canon G10 may be about the same size as a Canon G1X, so should DPReview penalize the G10 severely for having much worse IQ at ISO 3200?

So, what I would suggest to DPR is to definitely compare differently sized sensors, but don't score one camera higher or lower than the other because of the camera body/sensor size ratio. More useful would be a measure of the ISO at which noise or image degradation is noticeable at a given print size or enlargement factor. This "Noisy ISO" rating could sit next to the score so we can all tell at a glance what the maximum useable ISO is.

0 upvotes
SDPharm
By SDPharm (Feb 14, 2012)

> It's frustrating when a particular product line, with an appealing line-up of features, seems to be doomed to come in second forever, due, apparently, to one particular, immutable characteristic. <

That's why New York Times movie reviews never give a star rating. There is just no easy way to condense a whole tool into a single number. I do agree that it's not a good idea to too much weight on high iso noise performance.

0 upvotes
IcyVeins
By IcyVeins (Feb 14, 2012)

Solid camera, it was class leading for a few months. But now there's not much reason to be excited about it, because it's totally dominated by the Olympus E-M5. I guarantee that camera will get a gold star and likely an 80% rating too as long as its IQ matches the GX1.

4 upvotes
bluevellet
By bluevellet (Feb 14, 2012)

A bit strange to punish a camera in a review because of another camera not yet on the market and not yet reviewed by DPReview.

3 upvotes
photo nuts
By photo nuts (Feb 14, 2012)

Nice release. :)

0 upvotes
ccl2003
By ccl2003 (Feb 14, 2012)

Is the GX-1 a better option than Nikon J1 or V1? How about the G3 since they use the same sensor?

0 upvotes
ijack
By ijack (Feb 14, 2012)

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.

0 upvotes
YouDidntDidYou
By YouDidntDidYou (Feb 14, 2012)

looks a bit boring compared to the Olympus O-MD E-M5 and this seems to be the direction Panasonic are going, they have even removed the dynamic black and white film mode (the only one I regularly use, apart from std colour)!!!

2 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (Feb 14, 2012)

Poor old Panasonic, they just can't win...

(GF2 comes out)
Everyone: We hate it! We want a GF1 replacement
(Later)
Panasonic: Ok here you go
Everyone: We hate it! We want a camera like the NEX7!
(2 months later)
Everyone: We hate it! We want a camera like the E-M5!

:)

13 upvotes
NowHearThis
By NowHearThis (Feb 14, 2012)

@Andy

+10. Best post in here!

0 upvotes
Vlad S
By Vlad S (Feb 14, 2012)

GX-1 has been in stores for months even before OM-D was announced. It also does not compete wit OM-D, but with E-Px, so the target market is different. When GH3 is announced then you can compare it with OM-D.

0 upvotes
the-bunker
By the-bunker (Feb 14, 2012)

Funny thing is the GF2 got slated & prices tumbled - so I bought one at a bargain price & now it's my favourite camera.
At the end of the day reviews are just reviews - the only way to find out if a camera is for you is to own one & use it...

0 upvotes
YouDidntDidYou
By YouDidntDidYou (Feb 15, 2012)

Panasonic are not being bold with their camera features or vision, they are starting to behave very canikon like!
Panasonic are better when they are hungry...

btw I'm probably the only Panny wedding photographer out there and have been for 5 years as well as running some Panny flickr groups.

1 upvote
Peiasdf
By Peiasdf (Feb 14, 2012)

Why is the reviewer named Amadou Diallo, the guy that was shot by NYPD on February 4, 1999?

Now, back to topic. The camera is just a simple G3 repack. Not much improvement to speak of. I hope E-M5 have made bigger improvement with the same 16mp sensor. The spec of E-M5 is a lot better than GX1 for sure.

Comment edited 17 seconds after posting
1 upvote
pomoville
By pomoville (Feb 14, 2012)

I guess it's because that's his name.

18 upvotes
SDPharm
By SDPharm (Feb 14, 2012)

> The spec of E-M5 is a lot better than GX1 for sure.

Sure, except it doesn't even take pictures since it's not available today. As someone else already mentioned, the yet unannounced GH3 is much much better than OM-D E-M5.

0 upvotes
raztec
By raztec (Feb 14, 2012)

Put a high res EVF in this baby like the NEX 7n and then it's worth considering.

2 upvotes
Knight Palm
By Knight Palm (Feb 14, 2012)

-It's probably coming, await a GX2?
-Are you prepared to trade the flash for an internal EVF?

0 upvotes
jaja_m
By jaja_m (Feb 14, 2012)

Amadou, based on the conclusion I got a feeling that today's mirrorless cameras are very good that even a camera as good as the GX1 is a difficult proposition...

0 upvotes
Amadou Diallo
By Amadou Diallo (Feb 14, 2012)

The mirrorless market is a much more crowded one today than it was just two years ago. That may be one of the bigger challenges facing the GX1.

1 upvote
marike6
By marike6 (Feb 14, 2012)

That's why choices often come down to lenses. Put a lens like the PL 25 1.4 or the smaller 20 1.7 on the GX1 and it's nearly perfect.

Sony's makes great bodies and sensors but they simply don't yet offer the small, sharp and fast lenses that Panasonic and Olympus do. Of course, talking just stills Fuji's newest offering may THE camera, unless you need telephoto lenses. The point is there are always trade-offs and compromises even at this level of camera.

4 upvotes
ThePhilips
By ThePhilips (Feb 14, 2012)

@marike6. With lenses you are touching the sensitive ground. At least to me.

DPR's *camera* reviews are probably the best which there are out there. Yet, they are quite useless when it comes to the actual buying decision or comparing systems - because they largely brush off the lenses. It works for P&S. But for DSLR/ILC, reviewing a camera without lenses, IMO makes very little sense.

That's why simple hands-on and shallow amateur's /reviews/ often provide more perspective on the camera: because it is reviewed together with some lens, giving a good idea what I would really get if I buy the same package.

0 upvotes
jj74e
By jj74e (Feb 14, 2012)

glad to see a new review out....but how did the GX1 receive priority? it's essentially the same camera as the G3 is an enthusiast oriented rangefinder body with slightly better performance. although i guess it is a 'revival' camera that's high in popularity right now...

But I am surprised at how much better the GX1 is compared to the G3. Using the comparison tool at the conclusion page, the performance is significantly better..but I thought the sensor and AF were basically the same systems. interesting...

Comment edited 10 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Amadou Diallo
By Amadou Diallo (Feb 14, 2012)

Sandwiched between the intro page and the conclusion is a review ;-). We tend to explain our findings in there.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
12 upvotes
jj74e
By jj74e (Feb 14, 2012)

Haha I did read the review- but the difference in the performance bar was still surprising.

0 upvotes
Infared
By Infared (Feb 14, 2012)

I own both cameras. I have to back DPR up on this one....I have to say the GX1 (V. 1.1) is much more fluid in your hands once you set it up (customize) to your needs than the G3. You can do so much so quickly without every going into the deep menu system..and everything does seem faster. ...but the G3 is a great bargain for what you get for the money spent. Viewfinder and articulating screen included in the price so its a tough call. I like both cameras intensely..but if I can pick up only one it is the GX1 with the LVF2 attached....Great change from my GF1 with a 95MB/s card I can shoot 7-frame brackets in full-size RAW with one touch ..no waiting for card writing. There is a lot to like about this MFT camera and when you couple all the lens choices I think it does compete with ANY other mirrorless camera out there simply from depth of AF fisheye to 600mm (equivalent), with more and more fast aperture glass for low-DOF appearing regularly. No other mirrorless camera can touch that!

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Feb 14, 2012)

hmmm...

Panasonic GX1 w/14-42mm f/2.8-f/5.6:

FOV: 28-84mm (FF equivalent)
DOF Aperture Diameters (widest opening)
14/2.8 = 5mm (28mm equivalent FOV)
42/5.6 = 7.5mm (84mm equivalent FOV)

versus

Canon PowerShot G1X w/15.1-60.4mm f/2.8-f/5.8:

FOV: 28-112mm (FF equivalent)
DOF Aperture Diameters (widest opening)
15.1/2.8 = 5.4mm (28mm equivalent FOV)
45.8/5.6 = 8.2mm (85mm equivalent FOV)
60.4/5.8 = 10.4mm (112mm equivalent FOV)

looks like the Canon PowerShot G1X is going to be more flexible, as expected, for shallower dof, and zoom, than Panasonic m43 GX1.

although Canons have always offered full-time exposure simulation live (pre)view (ES-LV), i'm not sure what Panasonic offers, whether it is part time or any at all; only some m43 models have it, and some none at all. i've checked all previous models, and ES-LV isn't consistently offered on Panasonics.

Canon PowerShot G1X has the classic PowerShot G VASS (vari-angle swivel screen) to best use of ES-LV in Full M

but not GX1...

Comment edited 10 minutes after posting
4 upvotes
Bob Meyer
By Bob Meyer (Feb 14, 2012)

I like Canon's just fine, but to say a camera without an interchangeable lens is "more flexible" that an ILC is just ludicrous. Try setting the Canon to a 50mm f 1.4 equivalent. What? You can't? Why not, the GX-1 can. OK, where's the 600mm equivalent lens for the Canon? Don't have that either? So sorry.

Comment edited 25 seconds after posting
17 upvotes
DioCanon
By DioCanon (Feb 14, 2012)

to Bob
it is more flexible.
people I know with mirrorless have only the kit lens.
The only one I know has a tele, never carries with her.
People want a mirrorless to be portable.
Hence the Canon, though far from perfect is more flexible than the Pana with a kit lens.

3 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Feb 14, 2012)

FF FOV: 28-112mm

DOF Aperture Diameters (widest opening) in FF lenses: f/apertures

Panasonic GX1 (DOF)
5mm (28mm equivalent FOV) = 28/5 = f/5.6
7.5mm (84mm equivalent FOV) = 84/7.5 = f/11.2

PowerShot G1X (DOF)
5.4mm (28mm equivalent FOV) = 28/5.4 = f/5.2
8.2mm (85mm equivalent FOV) = 85/8.2 = f/10.4
10.4mm (112mm equivalent FOV) 112/10.4 = f/10.8

if one wants... yet shallower dof... one now must go APS-C or larger sensor... (and the lens available along with them)

frankly, for DOF specifically, f/5.6 to f/11 is IDEAL (this way, most will not have AF issues on too shallow lens scenarios, and many will be happy with the more 'focus free' look of higher dof, which AF systems can more readily handle than super low dof)

0 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Feb 14, 2012)

it is flexible... for a integrated compact zoom, and that's what folks want on a compact, but the problem with folks opting for the ILC, is the notion is compact (definitely less 'pocketable' than the PowerShot G1X), and refer to integrated compact zooms as 'fixed' lens (as though it is stuck with 'one' focal length, it isn't; the rhetoric would throw off a newbie, but not the rest of us)

i'd rather have multiple cameras, than one body stuck with multiple lens OUT IN THE FIELD...

what if Canon came out with 'variants' on the G1X?

this is what i had hoped they would do, i surely don't want loose open lenses, but sealed integrated systems much more compact.

if Canon offered:

G1X (28-112 zoom)
G1Xw (24 - 96 optical zoom) woah!!!
G1Xt (96 - 288 optical zoom) woah!!!

i'd get Both the 'w' and the 't' (yes, Two!)

and actually forgo with the G1X 'current'!!!!

frankly, offer me a Canon Pro1X w/ 12.9mm-51.8 @ f2.4-5.7
(24-96mm FOV) and PowerShot G1X sensor, I'd be absolutely giddy...

:D

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
1 upvote
marike6
By marike6 (Feb 14, 2012)

If Canon did this, if Canon did that. But they didn't. They released a mildly interesting G series type P&S with a larger sensor and a slow zoom. zzzz.

This review is about a Panasonic GX1. Canon got plenty of ink here on DPR when the G1X was released, so for the love of god, give it a rest.

Comment edited 31 seconds after posting
25 upvotes
Infared
By Infared (Feb 14, 2012)

One look in the viewfinder of the Canon brick and that camera is a DEAD issue for any serious photography...and I have to agree with Bob..the Canon is WAY less flexible. If you are a casual vacation snappy snapper (and have to buy a safe name..can you say Toyota..zzzzzz), the Canon is great..if you are very serious about your photography at all it is not. Now..if Canon comes out with an ILC with that sensor and an array of fast glass...I will shut my mouth! LOL!

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Sosua
By Sosua (Feb 14, 2012)

OMG OMG The Powershot has a CANON label - MIFFS (Most important feature for Sydue)!

1 upvote
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (Feb 14, 2012)

20mm f1.7
25mm f1.4
45mm f1.8

nuff said.

3 upvotes
Infared
By Infared (Feb 14, 2012)

LOL!!!! Andy, you forgot to list the newly announced Oly 75mm 1.8!!!!!!!

Comment edited 23 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
zxaar
By zxaar (Feb 14, 2012)

"20mm f1.7
25mm f1.4
45mm f1.8

nuff said.
"

Not pocketable now.

1 upvote
elotorero
By elotorero (Feb 15, 2012)

zxaar,

uhm except for the 20 1.7, that is pocketable definitely.

0 upvotes
zxaar
By zxaar (Feb 15, 2012)

yaa 20 1.7 is pocketable. And all the other lenses should not be counted when compared to G1X. With 20 F1.7 though one would lose zoom range and won't be competitive against G1X. For the given volume of G1X, the m43 is no match.

0 upvotes
bobbarber
By bobbarber (Feb 14, 2012)

I will never ever buy a Canon, because of the Canon shills on this forum. That is it. I'm done, kaput, forever. I am looking to a DSLR to compliment my four thirds gear. It will be a Nikon.

5 upvotes
onlooker
By onlooker (Feb 14, 2012)

And this has what to do with the Panasonic GX1?

Comment edited 18 seconds after posting
16 upvotes
Paul Farace
By Paul Farace (Feb 14, 2012)

Shills? Get a life! They're all tools, and only tools! You're only hurting yourself!

4 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Feb 14, 2012)

You read my mind, onlooker. I personally don't care what anyone on these forums has to say about anything. I'll have a discussion, learn what I can, and make my own decisions. Too many people around here are just constantly angry. I dig the review, but still don't care anything about the camera.

4 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (Feb 14, 2012)

ahem, this is the GX1, not the G1X :)

0 upvotes
akjos
By akjos (Feb 14, 2012)

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...

0 upvotes
Peiasdf
By Peiasdf (Feb 14, 2012)

What are you talking about? Have you read page 1 of the review? NEX-7 is the same depth as GX1 and thinner than Samsung NX200 with the kit lens. NEX-5 is even thinner than NEX-7 so it is actually the thinnest camera with good IQ.

I also have no idea why you'd pick GF3 over any camera. The sensor is crap and Panasonic has worse JPEG vs Olympus so you are looking at the worst IQ camera you can buy.

Your choice of 14-42x also tells me you don't care much about IQ as long as the camera is small. You might as well get a XZ-1 or S100 and save a bunch.

1 upvote
ijack
By ijack (Feb 14, 2012)

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.

6 upvotes
Peiasdf
By Peiasdf (Feb 14, 2012)

@ ijack
Have you also not read page 1 of the review? The 18-55 is actually smaller than 14-42 (NEX-7 mount is thicker but overal thickness is the same so lens is shorter)

If he thinks GF3 has better AF speed than E-P3, E-PL3 and you are defending him, that tells me how much you really care about camera performance.

PEN > GF
OM-D > GX
Nothing touches GH however

1 upvote
Infared
By Infared (Feb 14, 2012)

DAMN...its rough in here today! :-)

0 upvotes
OneGuy
By OneGuy (Feb 14, 2012)

Very good comments, Akjos

There are people here arguing on the basis of specs, but specs are just for orientation. If one goes by specs, one should get Fuji and marvel at the orbs (no extra charge).

Then there are people arguing on the basis of "expert" review, say, dpr. But the cam is the extension of you.

Then they are people siting on (Canon) legacy equipment and need to reaffirm their stuff is better than Pana GX1 and anything the m4/3 wave can bring. (I skip anything by sdyue and hope the world is big enough we never meet.)

I handled Sams NX200 and it went from slow AF to no AF as I zoomed. I like the store experience because I think the camera talks to you. More strange the circumstances, and coupled with a positive experience, the more it is the cam for you and happier you'll be.

It appears GX1 has GF1-GF3 genes and should be a good cam. But if GF3 turned you on, you've found your girlfriend. I don't know anybody who thinks a marriage counselor would make a good spouse.

1 upvote
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Feb 14, 2012)

Panasonic GX1... at this rate, if the Canon PowerShot G1X can match EOS 60D... then... m43 latest has its work cut out...

ISO 12800 DPReview comparison:
5DMkII vs 60D (subbing for PowerShot G1X) vs NEX-5N vs Panasonic GX1:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/studiocomparefullscreen.asp#baseDir=%2Freviews_data&cameraDataSubdir=boxshot&indexFileName=boxshotindex.xml&presetsFileName=boxshotpresets.xml&showDescriptions=false&headerTitle=Studio%20scene&headerSubTitle=Standard%20studio%20scene%20comparison&masterCamera=canon_eos5dmkii&masterSample=img_0059&slotsCount=4&slot0Camera=canon_eos5dmkii&slot0Sample=img_0059&slot0DisableCameraSelection=true&slot0DisableSampleSelection=true&slot0LinkWithMaster=true&slot1Camera=canon_eos60d&slot1Sample=img_0237&slot2Camera=sony_nex5n&slot2Sample=dsc00800&slot3Camera=panasonic_dmcgx1&slot3Sample=p1030070&x=-0.3384349901964302&y=1.2617338929958122

the GX1 may be fine for good light... if that's what one shoots, then one will be fine, if not, forget it...

1 upvote
TrojMacReady
By TrojMacReady (Feb 14, 2012)

First, this isn't really the place to start linking but if you must, shortening a link like that is crucial. Now it messes up the whole board.

3 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Feb 14, 2012)

at ISO 3200 - 6400 ... noise is quite distinct apart from others
worse beyond

otherwise pretty good up to ISO 1600 keeps up except resolving details less

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Feb 14, 2012)

I actually own a GX1 and it's fine in low light. It's actually a bit better than the Canon G1X. Don't believe me have a look at DXOMark:

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Reviews/Canon-PowerShot-G1X-Review/Canon-G1X-vs-hybrid-cameras

Obviously, you'll reply that DXOMark's tests aren't valid. That is until they support your argument and have one of your beloved Canon's on top, which is not often these days (And I say this as a 5D Mk II owner).

Comment edited 55 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Feb 14, 2012)

unlike the forums... here, links cannot be shortened
:\

as for DXOMark... numbers don't predict much... bottom line is always the images produced by a sensor, which defy the numbers (typically)

Panasonic GX1 @ 6400
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/GX1/FULLRES/GX1hSLI06400NR3D.HTM

Canon PowerShot G1 X @ 6400
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/G1X/FULLRES/G1XhSLI06400NR2D.HTM

as i've reiterated elsewhere

at ISOs up to 1600... fabric details is better on PowerShot G1X, but worse on Panasonic GX1 even though it does better (must be lens?) on resolving the fine black lines on the white PS 69 circular proportion chart (=a strength; the lens, not the sensor)

no doubt, all reviews tend to use default settings and fixed studio lighting conditions, so only multi-lower intensity dim light will truly test the limits of the sensor

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 13 minutes after posting
1 upvote
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Feb 14, 2012)

marike6:

Have you got a hold of Canon G1X RAW files? And what software did you use to extract them?

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Feb 14, 2012)

@sdyue

I like the way you think. For example, whenever a Canon camera excels at something, details, high ISO, You're all "way to go".

When the Panasonic GX1 bests the Canon G1X, "it must be the lens" you say.

Last time I checked the lens is part of the camera.

No offense, but all your shilling and boring DOF charts are won't convince m43's shooters. I can almost guarantee that no photographer here is interested in some slow zoom camera. Check back when we can mount a 25 1.4 or 45 1.8 on the Canon G1X of yours.

You want to add a comment that is relavent to the Panasonic GX1 other than a troll comment that's fine. But do you really think this bottom of a Panasonic m43's review is an appropriate place to drool over a Canon G1X?

2 upvotes
Jmmg
By Jmmg (Feb 14, 2012)

Imho, The closest/ better quality compare to the Canon 5D Mk2 is the Sony Nex 5n...

0 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (Feb 14, 2012)

@sdyue FYI you can use tinyurl to shorten links

1 upvote
carlos roncatti
By carlos roncatti (Feb 14, 2012)

its incredible how little panasonic improved their sensors, comparing to aps-c ones...we can see that even samsung with 20mp now, seems better than the 14mp one....(jmo)....

2 upvotes
TrojMacReady
By TrojMacReady (Feb 14, 2012)

Not really true. Just compare it with the first generation of mirrorless cameras that had sensors still used by Olympus today. Big difference. The efficiency gap is pretty much down to the size difference (compared to APS-C) now.

What's still laging behind a little is deeper shadow noise, so called read noise. Even if improved quite a bit the last years too, it's still well over a stop behind Sony APS-C sensors in this regard and clearly limits the available DR. Which they are partially trying to mask by metering higher compared to midle grey, which in turn has a negative impact on the highligt range, with a relatively fast (steep) rolloff.

In their defence though, Samsung doesnt do much better in this regard, with an APS-C sized sensor that is.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (Feb 14, 2012)

The GX1 sensor is a lot better than the previous 12mp sensor even at lower ISOs, the shadow noise is much lower which gives you more scope to post process, especially when pushing midtones etc.

0 upvotes
Aaron MC
By Aaron MC (Feb 14, 2012)

Rather disappointing to me. I've had the GF1 since launch, and this is nothing more than measured steps forward. I need more than that to plunk down my cash

4 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Feb 14, 2012)

Honestly Aaron, if you shot with a GX1 you wouldn't think the progress over the GF1 measured at all. I had a GF2, and the GX1 destroys it in every way: IQ at base ISO, high ISO, speed, customization, color response. My GF2 simply wasn't great above ISO 800. Colors at high ISO were not great. This is no longer the case. My GX1 can easily shoot ISO 1600, 3200. The electronic bubble level alone is worth the price of admission for me. All cameras should have this feature.

For well under $600 (since I purchased it with the PL 25 1.4) for the GX1 body this camera is a no-brainer. Beautiful, clean files, RAW detail is excellent, JPEGs are miles ahead of any other GF camera and my GH2, and paired with the 25 or 20 with the new grip, this camera is tough to beat for something so small and versatile.

1 upvote
Lost in Time
By Lost in Time (Feb 14, 2012)

Hardly a "no-brainer". The G3 costs less, gives the same image quality and has essentially the same handling - yet it also gives you an EVF and articulating LCD.

As a GF1 owner who shoots RAW and uses the LVF most of the time, it is very difficult to justify the upgrade. For me, the biggest problem with the GF1 is low-ISO dynamic range: burnt highlights vs shadow noise. The GX1 sensor performs identically to the GF1 in this area and is significantly worse than competing cameras (esp. Sony).

I think that a lot of people are going to wait and see what the new Olympus models offer.

1 upvote
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (Feb 14, 2012)

If you want a bigger change then how about the Olympus E-M5?

1 upvote
marike6
By marike6 (Feb 14, 2012)

@Lost in Time
The GX1 does not perform identically to the GF1 at all, low ISO or high ISO. It's IQ is better in every way. I used a GF2 for since it's release, and now have a GX1 and IQ differences a dramatic. The fact that you think they perform identically shows that you haven't shot with both cameras, and simply don't know what your talking about.

By the way, the new Olympus will have essentially the SAME IQ as the GX1 since it has the same Live MOS sensor. Oly JPEGs meaningless to a RAW shooter and it remains to be seen if the JPEGs are better anyway.

1 upvote
Lost in Time
By Lost in Time (Feb 14, 2012)

@marike6 - You may be confused by the ISO labels on the two cameras. ISO 160 on the GX1 is roughly the same real sensitivity as ISO 100 on the GF1. The dynamic range and shadow noise at base ISO are essentially the same for GF1 and GX1, and if you want better performance, the GH2 seems presently to be the only option (it is curious that Panasonic did not use the GH2 sensor in the new camera).

Where the G3/GX1 improves over the GF1 is higher ISO settings, but I find that less of a problem than the low ISO DR, which is very painful if you do much PP work with higher contrast scenes.

I don't think you can compare the new Olympus yet: no one has properly tested the IQ, which depends on both the sensor and surrounding circuitry.

Howver, what is very clear, is that the G3 (body) currently costs ~£375 UK (amazon), whereas the GX1+LVF2 costs £690. Clearly the GX1 is not a "no-brainer", even if not looking at other brands.

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
SDPharm
By SDPharm (Feb 14, 2012)

Andy said: If you want a bigger change then how about the Olympus E-M5?

I totally agree. That's a change from having a camera in your hand to no camera at all. :)

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Feb 15, 2012)

@Lost in Time Actually I am not confused about anything. The GF1 and GF2 cameras are older cameras that are not good above ISO 800. If you enjoy working with high ISO files from the GF1, go for it. I prefer to live in 2012, and I don't want to work with GF1 images that look like the color was sucked out of them except for the chroma noise at ISO settings above 800.

My GX1 cost me $539 USD because I bought it with the Panasonic/Leica 25 1.4. That, to me, is as much of a non-brainer as you'll find, especially if you have other m43 lenses. Plus I prefer metal cameras. If you like the more plastic G3, go for it.
My GH2 fills that role. Besides, the G3 only cheaper as it has been out for much longer.

As far as my characterization of the GX1 as a no-brainer, I apologize. I was under the impression that DPR just said it had THE BEST IQ of any m43 camera. What's not to like?

By the way, the low ISO is as clean as I need it to be, and the files hold up really well in LR.

0 upvotes
Fullframer
By Fullframer (Feb 15, 2012)

The GF1, GF2 and even now the GF3 are only good up to ISO 800 in less than ideal light without post processing. Sometimes even ISO800 can be messy. With the PL 25 F1.4 lens it enables for low ISO shooting even indoors no flash. Without the F1.4 or F1.7 pancake or other similary fast lens, you need to use the flash or use very high ISO.

0 upvotes
Fullframer
By Fullframer (Feb 15, 2012)

Marike 6... The GF3 while not as good as the GX1 sensor is a metal body as well and was only $299 during the holidays (special sale). Coupled with the PL 25 F1.4, you can shoot all the time under ISO 800 indoors no flash. Better bang for the buck than the GX1 which would have been bulkier and cost me an extra $250 to $300. Please note, this camera is just a replacement for my point and shoot. My pro work is still done a full frame DSLR with pro glass.

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Feb 14, 2012)

Replaced my GF2 with the silver GX1, but took the PL 25 1.4 instead of the 14-42 Vario X. The camera feels great in hand with grip, and IQ seems equal or better than my GH2 in RAW, and better in JPEG. (This is just an impression, no formal testing done yet). Even though DXOMark has the GH2 as having slightly better DR than GX1, I think in practice both cameras are equal in DR, and loads better than previous m43 cameras in this area.

I wish Panasonic hadn't "simplified" the video mode but even in auto it's very good. But they need to protect the GH2 I guess. Thank you DPR for the hard work on the review.

1 upvote
Fullframer
By Fullframer (Feb 15, 2012)

Yes, the PL 25 1.4 is the way to go on M43 camera bodies esp if you shoot indoors, no flash and want DSLR like bokeh. The 14-42 fails in that area. Have to use way to high of an ISO.

0 upvotes
PicOne
By PicOne (Feb 14, 2012)

Hi ISO Jpeg comparisons: The Panny shots look comparably well underexposed (is that fair when noting noise?), and for the 'smearing detail' only the Panny shots hold the line-etching details on either side of the coin's head.

Also.. comparisons with Samsung... is there a review coming of this camera soon?

0 upvotes
Total comments: 223