Previous news story    Next news story

Pro shooter to cover London 2012 using Panasonic Lumix DMC-G5

By dpreview staff on Jul 27, 2012 at 16:54 GMT

Panasonic has announced that Getty Images sports photographer Dean Mouhtaropoulos will be covering the London 2012 Olympic Games exclusively using its recently-announced Lumix DMC-G5. His images will be displayed both at the Getty Gallery next to London's Olympic Park, and on Panasonic UK's homepage. With sports photography traditionally the preserve of large SLR cameras, the company is hoping to showcase the capabilities of its mirrorless model in this notoriously-demanding field. We suspect the press release has more to do with making the most of its Olympic sponsorship than swaying other pros, but it should be interesting to see the results.


Press release:

Panasonic team up with leading sports Photographer and reveals the camera he’ll be using at London 2012 Olympic Games

Having recently announced the London 2012 Olympic Games Images Gallery at the Getty Gallery, Westfield Stratford City, Panasonic is pleased to announce that leading sports photographer, Dean Mouhtaropoulos will be exclusively using the newly announced Panasonic DMC-G5 LUMIX G camera to capture the London 2012 Olympic Games.

Dean Mouhtaropoulos has been granted access to the London 2012 Olympic Games to capture the unique, emotional and historic Olympic moments. Having worked for Getty Images (the Official Photographic Agency of the International Olympic Committee) for 9 years, Dean is well versed in capturing epic sporting moments including both Football and Rugby World Cups, the Olympics, Champions League football, World Championships in Swimming, Diving, Hockey, Athletics to name but a few.  With Dean’s extensive experience photographing sports, and his passion for photography that dates back to his 12th birthday, when he was first given a camera, Dean was the obvious photographer to be tasked with this momentous and epic task.

With historic moments captured in a fraction of a second, Dean needs a fast, responsive, lightweight camera with outstanding image quality. Panasonic is providing Dean with a DMC-G5 LUMIX G camera to capture the games on.  The G5 is a new addition to Panasonic’s multiple award winning LUMIX G range of cameras – having only been announced last week.

Perfectly designed for a sports photographer, thanks to its compact, classically designed and easy-to-grip chassis the LUMIX G5 is effortless to carry around, yet still provides the superior image quality required for such historic shots.

With a new 16.05-megapixel Live MOS sensor; the Venus Engine VII FHD image processor; and an ISO range of up to 12,800, the LUMIX G5 provides stunning image quality, even in low-light situations – perfect for demanding shooting conditions like the Olympics.

There are no second chances when shooting at the Olympics – that split second moment is there to be captured and you need a camera you can rely on. With highly precise, light speed Auto Focus, the G5 ensures you’ll never miss the perfect shot. Additionally, the LUMIX G5’s rapid burst shooting capability - at six Frames per Second (FPS) at full resolution - can capture multiple shots of fast-moving subjects with stunning clarity.

Dean will also carry a selection of LUMIX G Lenses in his kit bag, ranging from 7mm-300mm [1] including the recently launched 12-35mm [2] X lens, suitable for capturing a wide range of scenes thanks to a versatile zoom and F2.8 brightness in the entire zoom range,.

Images taken by Dean using the G5 will be showcased at the London 2012 Olympic Games Images Gallery at the Getty Gallery based in Westfield Shopping Centre, Stratford (4th July-15th September).  Visitors to the gallery will be able to interact with Panasonic’s showcase of Smart VIERA TVs showing live London 2012 Olympic content both in 2D and 3D being uploaded from all Olympic venues.

Additionally, Panasonic will be posting ‘Lumix G Photos of the Day’ on Panasonic’s homepage (www.panasonic.co.uk) throughout the Olympic Games – so keep a check on the website as this will be updated daily. From the homepage visitors will also be able to link to the Lumix Lifestyle (www.lumixlifestyle.co.uk) page to view the full Panasonic London 2012 photo gallery. Thorough the Lumix Lifestyle community there will also be a section on Panasonic at London 2012, including general information on Panasonic's equipment at London 2012, a biography of Dean and product information and images on the G5. If this wasn’t enough Panasonic’s London 2012 Flag Tags App will be featured on the site, as well as a gallery of sports photos taken by Lumix Lifestyle members.

Panasonic has been a supporter of the Olympic Games since 1988 and this latest announcement is just an example of the innovative, creative and informative ideas Panasonic is offering for people to fully enjoy London 2012.


[1] 35mm equivalent: 14-600mm

[2] 35mm equivalent: 24-70mm

Comments

Total comments: 301
123
intruder61
By intruder61 (Jul 28, 2012)

boring....next

0 upvotes
mauro paillex
By mauro paillex (Jul 28, 2012)

Culture, passion, attitude and u can be a great sport photographer. Every kind of camera can take great pictures! Most of people with a Leica on the neck has never, but never taken a good picture!! Just a fetish! But they talk a lot about photography!
P.S, excuse me for my english!

2 upvotes
OttoVonChriek
By OttoVonChriek (Jul 28, 2012)

Eppure in Italiano sia scorreto a confondere molti con tutti.

Sono pienamente d'accordi che il marchio Leica si atrai molti utente per via del prezzo (e sopratutto in paese come l'Italia).

Ma non é da scordare che il prezzo é anche frutto di un ottimo qualita combinato con una capacita a fare le attrezze molto compatto ma funzionale (di fatto fu Leica ad inventare il formatto 35mm).

Esiste, un lungo elenco di fotografi molto noto che utilizzava Leica.

P.S, scusate per il mio Italiano.

0 upvotes
abi170845
By abi170845 (Jul 28, 2012)

what's next? robotics to take the photos?

0 upvotes
napilopez
By napilopez (Jul 28, 2012)

The funny thing to me is that if these images were taken without mentioning the camera, I bet you no one would complain. But as of now, I'm willing to bet several people will complain about the quality of the photos only because they were shot with a G5.

A few things:

1) The photographer is skilled, he will likely get some great shot anyways.

2) People talk as if great sports photos weren't taken before the advent of modern-day, fast PDAF.

3) Every camera has its limitations and strengths. I think most of us here know a pro DSLR would still be the overall "best" for getting the most keepers, mainly due to focus tracking performance. Yes, it is obviously a marketing stunt. So what? The point is to prove it can go against the big boys, and I'm willing to bet if succeeds, even if not quite at the pinnacle of sports photo gear.

4) The camera hasn't even bee reviewed yet. Yet people assume it will suck, even though CDAF catching up in tracking is only a matter of time.

We'll see.

23 upvotes
mauro paillex
By mauro paillex (Jul 28, 2012)

Perfect!!

0 upvotes
CarlPH
By CarlPH (Jul 30, 2012)

Right on, I even bet the photog would have a grand time reading all these comments :)

0 upvotes
write2alan
By write2alan (Jul 28, 2012)

"It is the end that justifies the means."- Napolean
Who cares what tool he uses as long as he can get the results demanded from his clients.

10 upvotes
abi170845
By abi170845 (Jul 28, 2012)

whopedidooo...so what?

0 upvotes
Nmphoto
By Nmphoto (Jul 28, 2012)

A good photographer can take a good photo with anything. All you people who think you need the best gear, get ready to hang your heads in shame.

16 upvotes
garyknrd
By garyknrd (Jul 28, 2012)

What nonsense. I started with the cheap glass. And never was satisfied. Professional glass works. It is truly amazing. I wouldn't buy that lens for birding on a bet. I bet on a heavy crop it would be a muster cluck. And that is being kind.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
4 upvotes
Lionel Lam
By Lionel Lam (Jul 28, 2012)

I am compelled to agree with Nmphoto actually. Regardless of the gear you use, understanding their limitations is the first step to knowing what you can achieve with your equipment. I think Nmphoto was being general when he said you could take good pictures with 'anything'.

2 upvotes
gl2k
By gl2k (Jul 28, 2012)

Why then do pros spend so much money on their equipment ?

4 upvotes
gsum
By gsum (Jul 28, 2012)

So if I took a 'good' photo with a 2mp camera phone and then the same photo with a high res DSLR or mirrorless you'd choose former. Somehow I think not.

2 upvotes
ChrisKramer1
By ChrisKramer1 (Jul 28, 2012)

Post-processing is an important consideration too. I personally find the M4/3 files pretty limited for cropping and adjustments in PS (including PS6 and LR 4). Looking at the G3 and OMD-5 raw samples, noise levels are pretty high at ISO 400 and detail is not as good as the current APS-C sensors.

1 upvote
Professor999
By Professor999 (Jul 28, 2012)

@By gl2k,
I may be wrong but unless really large prints are necessary and as long as AF is adequate to the situation I humbly believe the only difference is ergonomics.
That is, two dials for altering shutter speed and aperture instead of one (or none), dedicated buttons for direct access to most used fuctions e.g. ISO.
A photographer can take great photos without the above but it just makes it quicker and easier with them. That may be the difference between getting a shot or not.
I'm sure the composition and contents would be the same in both cases as the photographer has the same image in mind.
I love having direct access to fuctions but I'm sure the photos I've taken (good or bad) would be the same whether with a 350d or 5 d.
As the saying goes, 'a bad workman blames his tools'.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Cass_Rimportant
By Cass_Rimportant (Jul 28, 2012)

Well, it's the nature of time that all the best photos through history have been taken with gear that's now "obsolete." Partially, what you think you need just depends on what sort of photos you like or are expected to make. My favorite "bird" photos were taken on large format film with a normal lens, and the only "sports" photos that I like were taken with moderate wide angle lenses on 35mm film.

0 upvotes
LWW
By LWW (Jul 28, 2012)

My crystal ball sees a headline of the future - "Photographer goes retro at the 2020 Olympic games using a mirrored camera".

0 upvotes
Barry Fitzgerald
By Barry Fitzgerald (Jul 28, 2012)

Nothing at all to do with Panasonic being the official sponsor for the Olympics ;-)
http://panasonic.net/olympic/

0 upvotes
Jack Simpson
By Jack Simpson (Jul 27, 2012)

Dean_M in action: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MvQoW05UlTA

and his usual kit is Canon :)

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Professor999
By Professor999 (Jul 28, 2012)

I posted the above link earlier.
Maybe after this experience he'll be selling up!
(Only joking! Maybe.)

0 upvotes
SDPharm
By SDPharm (Jul 27, 2012)

The best way to offend a photographer is to say "wow, that's a great photo, what kind of camera do you use?"

17 upvotes
gsum
By gsum (Jul 28, 2012)

Why?

2 upvotes
Professor999
By Professor999 (Jul 28, 2012)

I guess because the person makes the photo. The camera just saves it for others to see.
The camera is only the thing between the photographer and his or her perception of the image.
One should therefore praise the photographer and not the device used to reproduce it.
Or am I wrong?
Comments welcome.

1 upvote
SDPharm
By SDPharm (Jul 28, 2012)

> Or am I wrong?

Of course not, and I don't think there are absolutely right or wrong answers.

But I think many of us can agree on this, if you give a brilliant photographer a $200 point and shoot camera, that photographer can probably still produce some really good photos and prints. But if you give a non-photographer a Nikon D800 with the best lenses, he or she will still make crappy pictures. And I'm not even talking about crappy in terms of artistic values. I'm talking about technical stuff. An amateur is fully capable of producing high percentage of blurry, out of focus or wrongly exposed photos with some of the best cameras today.

0 upvotes
Cass_Rimportant
By Cass_Rimportant (Jul 28, 2012)

"Wow, you must own an expensive camera."

0 upvotes
Photomonkey
By Photomonkey (Jul 27, 2012)

Speed does help but they were shooting sports well before cameras got batteries.
Great photos will be taken and we will almost certainly not know what camera made them nor will we care.
Further, how many will actually view any of the images anywhere else than the web?

5 upvotes
zapatista
By zapatista (Jul 28, 2012)

What the hell, this is a gear-related website. Please refrain from posting anything resembling common sense.

4 upvotes
PerL
By PerL (Jul 27, 2012)

@alexpaytner
At the last Olympics Nikon D3 and Canon 1D3 was used. I dont think you realize how far behind the mirrorless cameras are.

2 upvotes
Professor999
By Professor999 (Jul 28, 2012)

I believe they're about 8 years behind as DLSRs from Canon and Nikon have been aroundsince about 2000.
Micro four thirds were announced 4 years ago and I'd say they're on the right road to shorten any gap that exists.

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Jul 28, 2012)

The gap for sport photography between m43 and FF DSLRs will never be closed. It has less to do with pixels and more to do with the smaller sensor of m43 not providing shallow enough DOF to isolate an athlete against a background the way a D4 and 400 2.8 or 600 f4 can. That's why if you look at the website's images they look nothing like the high quality sport images one might see in Sports Illustrated.

2 upvotes
Professor999
By Professor999 (Jul 28, 2012)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=igvybREjQxA
I watched the above the clip and came to a conclusion.

I think it would depend on the sport and the background and the skill of the photographer being able to choose it.

Definitely requires more creativity but that's what it' all about I suppose.

Not saying that the DOF isn't shallower but shallow depth of field can be a double-edged sword.

0 upvotes
CameraLabTester
By CameraLabTester (Jul 27, 2012)

Olympic photos usually portray images taken from long telephoto lenses, to get the action up close.

In reality, they are a dime a dozen, but still we gawk at them.

Perhaps the camera should focus more on the reality of being up close, at arms length, using normal to wide angles, and give the images a more "human interest" feel.

.

1 upvote
dylanbarnhart
By dylanbarnhart (Jul 27, 2012)

The problem is how to get close to the action without distracting the audience and blocking views from other cameras. Professional photographers already thought of it and that's why they are building robots cameras that could get very close to the action. The robots can stand in places that human can't.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/07/05/reutersroboticdslrs

Really, what's new in sport photography isn't resolution or even auto focus anymore. It's all about perspective now. The real war in professional photography is who builds the best robots, not who has the best camera.

0 upvotes
alexpaynter
By alexpaynter (Jul 27, 2012)

Micro 4/3 cameras of today have better resolution than the full frame cameras at the last Olympics. They are also much better in low light situations.

The SLR fanboys would have told you how amazing those cameras were at the last Olympics, but now they are saying cameras with better performance are not up to the job.

SLRs still focus more quickly but the gap is narrowing.

The only area of significant difference would be the depth of field. I don't understand the theory but apparently f1.8 on a micro 4/3 is equivalent to f3.6 on a full frame as far as DOF is concerned. In some cases this would benefit the smaller camera and sometimes the larger.

11 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Jul 28, 2012)

It has nothing to do with fanboys but physics and DOF.

a) m43 cameras have nowhere near the low-light ability of say a D3s which is 2 or 3 stops better than the best m43 camera.

b) m43 has too deep DOF to properly isolate an athlete against a given background the way a FF camera with a fast super-telephoto can. That's one reason why Sports Illustrated images are of such high calibre which we will likely never see from a m43 camera.

All you need to do is look at the above website to see that the gallery images look nothing like professional sports images and really, most of them could have been taken with a good P&S.

1 upvote
Professor999
By Professor999 (Jul 28, 2012)

a) I'm thinking 2 or 3 stops more and 7 times the price.

b) Depends on the background.
Just had a look at sports illustrated.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/multimedia/photo_gallery/1207/olympics-london-2012-day-1/content.2.html

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/multimedia/photo_gallery/1207/olympics-london-2012-day-1/content.3.html

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/multimedia/photo_gallery/1207/olympics-london-2012-day-1/content.1.html

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/olympics/2012/photos/wires/archery/20120727/content.1.html

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/olympics/2012/photos/wires/sailing/20120727/content.1.html

The photographer chooses the background and chooses the lens and while the DOF can't be as shallow as FF it can be adequate.

Comment edited 20 seconds after posting
1 upvote
flipmac
By flipmac (Jul 28, 2012)

@marike6

a) Low-light is important because the stadiums are poorly lit.

b) Backgrounds like a track, sand, grass field, water, other athletes, etc. are too distracting. Photos must have no discernible background so that the subject (like athletes) are taken out of context.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
jj74e
By jj74e (Jul 27, 2012)

I wonder if the photographer will note when he used MF or AF

But anyway, the shots should still be decent considering the skill of the user. I'd be less interested in seeing his photos (from a camera-capability standpoint, not from a regular Olympics fan's viewpoint) and more interested in seeing a commentary and the differences and changes he had to make in order to accommodate shooting with the G5.

0 upvotes
Ruy Penalva
By Ruy Penalva (Jul 27, 2012)

That is in accordance with the Olympic Games fair play. If you pay attention every DSLR is a mirrorless camera in video mode.

0 upvotes
Joe Ogiba
By Joe Ogiba (Jul 27, 2012)

At least m4/3rds has the 2nd largest line of native lenses of any mirrorless after the K-01 ;) How many native lenses does the Nex , Nikon 1 or EOS M have ?

1 upvote
dylanbarnhart
By dylanbarnhart (Jul 27, 2012)

If a huge number of sport photographers suddenly switch over to the G5 out of their own will then I'll be the believer.

For all we know, this one single photographer just got so much money out of Panasonic that he couldn't refuse. Heck, if Apple pays him millions of dollars to cover the Olympics with the iPhone, he probably would do it too. It's kind of easy to shoot when you know you already got paid even if you come back with lousy photos.

What Panasonic really wants people to think is that the G5 is good enough. And it's true. Most wannabees who bought professional DSLR's will do just fine with the G5. Just that I wouldn't pick it for professional sport coverage. Neither does 99% of all Olympics photographers out there.

2 upvotes
danieljcox
By danieljcox (Jul 27, 2012)

I love the Lumix line and I'm a huge fan of Panasonic mirrorless cameras but I hope they don't end up embarrassing themselves competing with Canon and Nikon. Will be interesting to see however and look at all the jabber this is creating.

www.naturalexposures.com

Comment edited 43 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Jogger
By Jogger (Jul 27, 2012)

ummm.. yea, the last line of the press release basically is all you need to know

1 upvote
villebon
By villebon (Jul 27, 2012)

Only measurebators judge the quality of an image by its sharpness or the lack of apparent noise, simply because they don't have any other criterias: the're camera users as in appliance users. Photography for them is point, shoot and pixel-peep.

4 upvotes
Jogger
By Jogger (Jul 27, 2012)

so, should all the pros there replace their stupid SLRs for iphones.. because its all about the photographer, right?.. nothing else matters

4 upvotes
Skytalker
By Skytalker (Jul 27, 2012)

Well yeah, this is true, this is why fashion shows are shot with nokia phones plus a lot of talent, and sports photographers just carry their high end equipment just for fun.
Indeed all that matters is the photographer. The best photographers do not even need a camera to take a photo, their talent will subtitute the equipment.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 58 seconds after posting
5 upvotes
RichardAB
By RichardAB (Jul 27, 2012)

It will only dismay the camera snobs.

Give a proper photographer control of the shutter, aperture, ISO, white balance, good glass and a good sensor and great shots will be produced.

Photographers create great photos, not cameras.

20 upvotes
Peter KT Lim
By Peter KT Lim (Jul 27, 2012)

Agree fully agree!

0 upvotes
PerL
By PerL (Jul 27, 2012)

Why do some people think that world class pro photographers are idiots when they choose their equipment?

0 upvotes
mister_roboto
By mister_roboto (Jul 27, 2012)

"Why do some people think that world class pro photographers are idiots when they choose their equipment?"

Because people read photography gear comments

Comment edited 24 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
ZorSy
By ZorSy (Jul 28, 2012)

And give him the prime spot as well... he won't be passing the first 1/3rd of the focal length. I'm glad for people who built up their reputation working really hard for years - now they can finally cash in this through the wealthy sponsors. He can finally enjoy the Olympics, taking snaps, enjoying full accreditation and being paid well - it is called success. We would do the same, I guess.

0 upvotes
dmanthree
By dmanthree (Jul 27, 2012)

I don't know what the big deal is. Photographers used to cover the games with no AF, no auto metering, and only a few fixed focus lenses. For certain events you can pre-focus and fire at will. For runners you can pre-focus on the finish line and time your shots to capture the finish. Honestly, I don't know why this is such a challenge. The lighting is usually very good to excellent so there's no low light shooting, the action is predictable, for the most part, and the image quality from pretty much any digital camera will do for on-line display or small prints. If the shooter posts some shots from a soccer game that are similar to those posted by the other pro shooters, I'll be impressed. I've yet to see any CDAF camera with even semi-decent continous AF for action shots.

10 upvotes
mister_roboto
By mister_roboto (Jul 27, 2012)

Heh I know right? I saw in a forum post once someone complaining that a medium telephoto lens didn't have optical stabilization, and they didn't know how someone could take photos with it.

1 upvote
PerL
By PerL (Jul 27, 2012)

He would be better of with a Nikon 3200 or the cheapest Canon rebel DSLR.
But I am sure he will be able to fight the camera and get some good shots, and some poor people actually will believe that m43 are as good as pro DSLRs.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Gully Foyle
By Gully Foyle (Jul 27, 2012)

Naah...

0 upvotes
alexpaynter
By alexpaynter (Jul 27, 2012)

Maybe I am seeing the comparison images incorrectly. I am assuming that this will have the same image sensor as the OMD. From what I can see the OMD is clearer than both the cameras you mentioned. If you put some good glass on it I don't see why you should get very good results.

1 upvote
PerL
By PerL (Jul 27, 2012)

The lens selection on the entry level Nikons and Canons are way superior, the AF-C is probably better and the OVFs dont sufferfrom the live view problems of EVFs - so yes, the entry level DSLRs from Nikon and Canon are a much better choice.

0 upvotes
mister_roboto
By mister_roboto (Jul 27, 2012)

meh

Comment edited 31 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Gully Foyle
By Gully Foyle (Jul 27, 2012)

There are people who see an image and judge it for what it is, IQ-wise, no matter what equipment was used for taking it. And then there are those people who will not admit what they really see because it was taken by what they think is sub-par equipment.

What is so hard to get, is that mFT has reached really high IQ levels that are indistinguishable to what the latter (people) think "The Best". And this fact they won't admit, no matter who tells them or even what their very eyes tell them.

4 upvotes
John P.
By John P. (Jul 27, 2012)

I wish him the best...he's going to need it!!!

3 upvotes
thinkfat
By thinkfat (Jul 27, 2012)

Panasonic must be pretty confident about the G5

0 upvotes
DenWil
By DenWil (Jul 27, 2012)

Gee, all access and a 700$ pocket cam. What a trade off. I'm sure they made it worth his while. There'll be another summer games in four years. Maybe his fame will earn him a Samsung phone for Brazil.

1 upvote
maxnimo
By maxnimo (Jul 27, 2012)

"the LUMIX G5 provides stunning image quality, even in low-light situations....."

So if I'm not stunned by the image quality at iso1600 will I get my money back?

1 upvote
cgarrard
By cgarrard (Jul 27, 2012)

So, if he can do it, anyone can do it!

(evin grin)

C

2 upvotes
Aleo Veuliah
By Aleo Veuliah (Jul 27, 2012)

Good idea, it is time now, for pro photographers know what a small system can do and the quality it has. And the good lenses that Micro 4/3 have. Good cameras with lot's of choices, both from Panasonic Lumix, and Olympus.

I use Panasonic Lumix for about 3 yeas, and I don't feel the need to use any DSLR camera, the Future is DSLM, Digital Single Lens Mirrorless.

11 upvotes
igorek7
By igorek7 (Jul 27, 2012)

It sounds like a good challenge, especially after shooting with Canon 1D mkIV.:
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XdwrUZerzSU"

I hope we will learn some tips from Dean on how to shoot sports with Panasonic G5, which turns out to be a great camera.

5 upvotes
ThePhilips
By ThePhilips (Jul 28, 2012)

Funny video. The only high-end/full-frame/pro-level capability of the camera used was the short shot-to-shot time. Because the guys were most of the time hammering the shutter button all the time.

The Canon's vision - where future camera would simply shoot full-res "video," allowing you later to pick good shots out of the stream - isn't that far off the mark.

0 upvotes
Gully Foyle
By Gully Foyle (Jul 27, 2012)

I wonder how many batteries he will have to carry along.

7 upvotes
iGio
By iGio (Jul 27, 2012)

One bag of fully charged batteries :)

0 upvotes
zapatista
By zapatista (Jul 28, 2012)

Well, the same battery as in a GH2, so possibly the same space as a 50mm f1.4 Canon or Nikon. So the weight advantage is now down to 15lbs.

0 upvotes
igorek7
By igorek7 (Jul 28, 2012)

Let's see. Canon 1D MkIV (1230 g; 1500 shots).
Panasonic G5 (396 g with battery; 320 shots on charge).
Add 4 more G5/GH2 batteries (about 200 g in total) and you will get less than half of the 1D MkIV weight.
Lenses too, at least half of the full frame in size and weight.

2 upvotes
Greg Gebhardt
By Greg Gebhardt (Jul 27, 2012)

For advertising purposes only.

1 upvote
MrRoger
By MrRoger (Jul 27, 2012)

Mind you, NON of the professinal video cameramen will be using phase AF.

I don't do much sports photography, but when I have I've done it by prefoccusing on where I expect the action to take place... Finishing line, 1 meter in front of the starting blocks...you get the idea.

I also once tried shooting a dowhill MTB with a pocket compact. Pre focus was no problem, but the shutter lag was a pain. I had to learn to guage the lag and anticipate.

3 upvotes
Panasonicus
By Panasonicus (Jul 27, 2012)

I was a Nikonian for decades and switched to Canon about 5 years ago. Then I found myself getting tired hauling around a lot of weight and space was getting to be a problem due to air travel restrictions. I needed to downsize without losing quality and the all-important viewfinder made necessary due to the presence of a fiery planet 93m away that makes LCD screens very hard to see. I made the leap to a Panasonic g3 and have never had a minute of regret. The battery life is awful but everything else is a plus including the diminuitive size and huge weight loss. I waited for Canon to come up with a DSLM but all we got was an already dated EVIL with no viewfinder. Panasonic and Olympus have the jump on the rapidly expanding M23 market. The DSLR is a dinosaur for all but the top pros who can afford huge and heavy camera FX bodies and super premium glass.

17 upvotes
Gully Foyle
By Gully Foyle (Jul 27, 2012)

Regarding glass, I, for one, would easily consider several mFT lenses "super premium".

2 upvotes
pinnacle
By pinnacle (Jul 27, 2012)

Its kind of fun reading the DSLR user comments. They are starting to actually get nervous about these whipper-snapper micro four thirds cameras.

It's just the beginning guys. AF is getting much better. IQ has made big gains in the last year. Canon is trying to get into the game quite a bit late and with a questionable entry but, they had to do something.

And...look at how much the lens selection has grown for the micro four thirds market. Woo-hoo!

I love it!
Dan

21 upvotes
IcyVeins
By IcyVeins (Jul 27, 2012)

So he's using the 7-14, 12-35, and 100-300, but I figure he must be using one of the cheap telephoto zooms too. I wonder if it's the 45-200, 45-175, or 45-150.

1 upvote
mpgxsvcd
By mpgxsvcd (Jul 27, 2012)

14-140mm.

3 upvotes
miketala
By miketala (Jul 27, 2012)

Bet it's the 35-100 f2.8.

0 upvotes
IcyVeins
By IcyVeins (Jul 27, 2012)

HAHAHAHAHA The beginning of the end for CANIKON!

3 upvotes
M Lammerse
By M Lammerse (Jul 27, 2012)

Eh...why is that? He probable could have used a Nikon V1 or J1 too (depending who offered him this marketing stunt first) results will be good so and so.

0 upvotes
audijam
By audijam (Jul 27, 2012)

if you can ask IOS not to sign any contract with CANIKON or ask large retailers to return all CANIKONs then yes your statement may come out correct....

for now....you are just being du*b

1 upvote
Professor999
By Professor999 (Jul 27, 2012)

Can't we all just try to get along.

3 upvotes
Greynerd
By Greynerd (Jul 27, 2012)

I suspect the professionals photographing the Olympics not sponsored by Panasonic will be exclusively Canikon.

1 upvote
IrishhAndy
By IrishhAndy (Jul 27, 2012)

What's your point caller?

0 upvotes
rude
By rude (Jul 27, 2012)

we all know how the af rate for fast action focus tracking shooting will be. but its worth a try as m43 in this area can only get better. but it still lags though. r

0 upvotes
gl2k
By gl2k (Jul 27, 2012)

Since we will never know the keepers rate this whole procedure tells us absolutely nothing.

Additionally ... will he ever tell the public how well (or not) the process of taking fast actions shots was ? I guess not.

2 upvotes
mister_roboto
By mister_roboto (Jul 27, 2012)

"keepers rate"- SIGH.

3 upvotes
Mssimo
By Mssimo (Jul 27, 2012)

You don't have to shoot many pictures to get good ones. Pick up a used book on photography 101.

5 upvotes
LensBeginner
By LensBeginner (Jul 27, 2012)

That makes sense to me!

Point is, you are bound to have some good photos to show as a publicity stunt even using a severely under underperforming camera (with relation to the type of photos being taken).

I could take a couple of good photos of an Olympic event with a disposable camera, but I certainly wouldn't choose one to cover such event as a professional photographer.

So this thing is almost certainly of little or no interest.

And yes, no matter how well you know the basics, you won't get many good available light action pictures with underperforming equipment.

1 upvote
schirmer
By schirmer (Jul 27, 2012)

Read Pekka Potka's blog on low light wildlife with OM-D: http://www.pekkapotka.com/journal/2012/7/17/wildlife-with-e-m5.html
EVF technology gives some advantages, performance isn't one dimensional

2 upvotes
LensBeginner
By LensBeginner (Jul 28, 2012)

Nope.
Wildlife needs long reach and a smaller sensor is actually an advantage, not so with sport events.

0 upvotes
Nmphoto
By Nmphoto (Jul 28, 2012)

How many keepers did Donald L. Robinson and Neil Leifer get in the Muhammed Ali vs Sonny Liston fight? or should that be how many didn't they get. WHO CARES. They both got two of the greatest sporting photos of all time. What did they use? only a gear head would care.

0 upvotes
LensBeginner
By LensBeginner (Jul 28, 2012)

It's not about a being a gear-head and it's not even about being obsessed about the photos you don't get, it's about "THE" photo you get or don't get, or even worse that the colleague standing next to you gets.

I could lose hundreds of photos and don't give a damn, but losing "THE" photo I could have gotten with more responsive or better performing gear would upset me a lot...

Robinson and Leifer got "THE" photo, maybe they used good gear, maybe they didn't, but if you are a pro and are relying on luck alone to do your job, well, then the day luck turns you'll be sorely disappointed.

0 upvotes
Cuongdka
By Cuongdka (Jul 27, 2012)

What Pany cam he would use in light rain?

2 upvotes
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (Jul 27, 2012)

Even tho I dont advise anyone to try it, Pany cams are not made out of sugar. My old Panasonic G1 with kit lens survived quite a bit of rain without problems, and not just one time. Not mentioning constant pretty high humidity in forests.

So light rain wont kill it. Usually doesnt kill most of dSLRs and similar.

2 upvotes
Professor999
By Professor999 (Jul 27, 2012)

Not a Panny but mft camera, Olympus EM5 is weather-sealed.

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Jul 27, 2012)

weather-sealed or not the cameras are not very different.
I've seen photos of Marines using old Canon 20D in tropical forests and in mideast deserts.

0 upvotes
Hugo808
By Hugo808 (Jul 27, 2012)

14-600mm eqv. I used to lie awake at night and dream about lenses like that....

0 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Jul 27, 2012)

Note that it says 'a range of lenses' - that's the whole range covered by mFT lenses, not one single monster zoom.

10 upvotes
Cy Cheze
By Cy Cheze (Jul 27, 2012)

Would an ordinary spectator be allowed to bring a G5 with the 140mm lens into an Olympic venue?
Might it be possible to get reliable focus by simply setting it manually for the approximate distance of the competitors?
Realistically, only a few people have close-up access where narrow DOF (or tricky focus) would make quick AF crucial.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (Jul 27, 2012)

Not sure if spectators are allowed to bring cameras at all?

Pros can choose whatever they want. Ive seen sport pros with Olympus gear and even more exotic things like D3X..

0 upvotes
Brian D. Schneider
By Brian D. Schneider (Jul 28, 2012)

I saw several DSLRs in the audience last night. Lenses longer than 30cm are not allowed.

0 upvotes
Dan4321
By Dan4321 (Jul 27, 2012)

I've been there, it's hard to use these cameras for sporting events if you are used to the modern automatic DSLRs. Autofocus can't be relied on, ever so slight viewfinder lag, etc. They can be fine for a lot of things, but for sporting events, basically zone focus and keep your other eye open all the time to not miss any action... not saying it can't be done, just that I wouldn't choose it given the choice.

0 upvotes
Light Adrenaline
By Light Adrenaline (Jul 27, 2012)

I agree. I've tried them as well. As a professional sports photographer, it's hard enough with the latest gear (D4, D3s) and pro optics to always perform well. Add to it the inherent limitations of AF and responsiveness and it's out the window for some things. With gymnastics - rings and beam might be ok, but swimmers up for air in and out of water and erratic sports with obstacles in the way like volleyball - I'm thinking not. Will be very interested in seeing the quality and hearing the tales...

1 upvote
h2k
By h2k (Jul 27, 2012)

Is it sure that he will do the actual sport? Maybe he just takes atmospheric shots around the main action - athletes preparing for the start, talking to their coaches, like that. Anyway the flip-screen will give him interesting angles that are hard to reach for people who use a view-finder only.

2 upvotes
belard
By belard (Jul 27, 2012)

Shouldn't the Games be sponsored by Olympus?

16 upvotes
Jorginho
By Jorginho (Jul 27, 2012)

Well, I Have a Gh2. Not to dissimilar. Very happy, do BIF etc. Nice. But he will be working hard with I think. It is the only thing DSLRs are still clearly better. Nex Olympics will be different I think...

0 upvotes
JEROME NOLAS
By JEROME NOLAS (Jul 27, 2012)

Why not? Next you can make pics with compact....

0 upvotes
Total comments: 301
123