Previous news story    Next news story

DPReview Gear of the Year Part 2: Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1

By dpreview staff on Nov 20, 2013 at 11:59 GMT
Buy on GearShop$748.006 deals

A lot of equipment passes through our Seattle and London offices, everything from high-end cameras to inexpensive accessories. A lot of it gets reviewed, but we can't cover everything. In this series of short articles, DPReview staff will be highlighting their personal standout products of the year. In part 2, Allison Johnson comments on her personal favorite - the Panasonic Lumix GM1.

177
I own it
251
I want it
93
I had it
Discuss in the forums
Our favorite products. Free 2 day shipping.
Support this site, buy from dpreview GearShop.
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1

Comments

Total comments: 295
12
videofame
By videofame (4 months ago)

Would this camera be fully compatible with the Olympus M.ZUIKO DIGITAL ED 12-40mm F2.8 PRO lens?

0 upvotes
patchfree
By patchfree (4 months ago)

So it could be interesting, at least for its lowest focal (12 mm) because the standard 14-42 mm in my practice apprears a bit too long.
But what about its perf?

0 upvotes
Hen3ry
By Hen3ry (4 months ago)

Allison - delightful. Your reaction to the thing in hand is exactly what I hoped it would be. I will have the GM1 in a week but without the silly grip. I will add a couple of stick-on rubber furniture feet to the front of it to anchor my fingers. :)

Cheers, geoff

0 upvotes
patchfree
By patchfree (4 months ago)

Is the new 12-32mm for GM1 fittable on the GX1?

0 upvotes
ThePhilips
By ThePhilips (4 months ago)

Obviously yes.

12-32 is a normal m43 lens.

0 upvotes
WeddingEtCetera Com
By WeddingEtCetera Com (4 months ago)

New sample video with the DMC-GM1 on https://vimeo.com/81744933.
Cheers.

1 upvote
Nerkdergler
By Nerkdergler (4 months ago)

"A good camera is not hard to find... It's the way you intend to use a camera that makes a difference in how well suited it is for you."

Amen Allison. Almost all of the things presented by commenters as 'good' or 'bad' (eg viewfinder) are simply personal preference. All useful opinions, but only relevant to users with the same preferences.

2 upvotes
mosc
By mosc (4 months ago)

I don't get it. If you really really must have small, why do you want ILC? Is the lens selection you have to chose from just SO awesome? Is somebody really going to go out and put on the 90% of 4/3rds lenses that outweigh this little thing?

I don't understand the point of an ILC for a tiny camera. If size is the top priority, an internal power zoom just wins. Why would you get a Nikon 1 when there's the RX100? Why would you get the Q7 when there's an S120?

Do people really view ILC as a feature even without carrying multiple lenses? If you buy an ILC camera and keep one lens on it you either have something big enough where ILC doesn't add size/weight (dslr) or something silly.

I get 4/3rds. You want to carry around glass without breaking your back. Cutting the total kit weight makes sense while keeping the flexibility of ILC. But this isn't like that. No sane person would mount a portrait length lens on this thing. Why does it even have an ILC to begin with?

2 upvotes
MDGColorado
By MDGColorado (4 months ago)

I don't get what you don't get. The GM1 means I can really really have small and still change lenses. The lenses I would use are the small primes, and more are on the way. There is no downside to interchangeable lenses here.

13 upvotes
Ulric
By Ulric (4 months ago)

I believe I am sane but I still have the Olympus 45/1.8 on the GM1 right now. I don't think there is anything comparable on the market.

4 upvotes
cuatrocu
By cuatrocu (4 months ago)

http://j.mp/1br0xBr

1 upvote
ianp5a
By ianp5a (4 months ago)

Easy. For someone with m4/3 lenses, it makes a perfect second body. That doubles as a pocket camera, a backup camera for travelling, an unobtrusive street shooter and something to save you changing lenses in a hurry.

3 upvotes
T3
By T3 (4 months ago)

" No sane person would mount a portrait length lens on this thing. Why does it even have an ILC to begin with?"

I use the Oly 45/1.8, which is a beautiful m4/3 lens that gives me a portrait length of 90mm (equivalent). The Oly 45/1.8 looks great on the GM1.

http://camerasize.com/compact/#491.93,ha,t

I have the Panasonic 14/2.5, Panasonic 20/1.7, and Oly 45/1.8. Each of these lenses is tiny, and I would love to use all these lenses on the GM1. So *that* is why it's an ILC! Time to get a clue, pal.

1 upvote
chillgreg
By chillgreg (5 months ago)

While another (woman's) perspective is a nice touch at DPR I'm sure, after reading your RX1002 review, and now the GM1, it has become clear where your priorities actually are.

Casually pulling the P&S-esqe RX1002 out of your purse over coffee with the girls no doubt goes by almost unnoticed; however the chorus of oohs and aahs that follow the inadvertent unveiling of the GM1 are a different story, right?

That cute and utterly gorgeous little thing just FEELS right. Right? Perhaps even Gold award-worthy??

4 upvotes
palinode
By palinode (4 months ago)

Seriously?

5 upvotes
DukeN
By DukeN (4 months ago)

So idiotic and borderline misogynistic, shocker given that avatar.

The GM1 is a pretty fantastic camera that lets you use different lenses, while keeping the size minimal.

Please let us know when RX takes all these different lenses?

2 upvotes
theRose
By theRose (4 months ago)

This comment is ridiculos! in 2013, haven't we come further?

1 upvote
srados
By srados (5 months ago)

This post by DP is vindication of Lumix GX7...

0 upvotes
tabloid
By tabloid (5 months ago)

Personally i would never buy a camera without a viewfinder.
No good in sunlight, when on holiday.

With a little electronic add on viewfinder, it would be worth a second look at.

2 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (5 months ago)

one may risk his life using a keyhole-peeping type viewfinder.

when I was a kid looking into the viewfinder of a TLR camera (you can think it as a dim 3" LCD), the river bank collapsed and I was quick to escape unhurt.

usually people have less awareness of the environemt, things happening around them when peeping into small finder. though we also lose chance, fail to recognize and record precious moments, we have but one life to lose.

why we need an assistant beside each camera man (to guide the guy as if he was blind), or an observer beside a sniper.

I don't like other people use iPad around me, but iPad is probably the most natural way to take photograph, and safer.

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Leandros S
By Leandros S (5 months ago)

If you didn't want to get hurt, why did you use a collapsible riverbank?

4 upvotes
panpen
By panpen (4 months ago)

"Personally i would never buy a camera without a viewfinder"

Pro's cannot live without a viewfinder

0 upvotes
dpmaxwell
By dpmaxwell (4 months ago)

Pros are the target market for the GM1?

1 upvote
WeddingEtCetera Com
By WeddingEtCetera Com (5 months ago)

Today, the DMC-GM1 is in my hands. It is almost too small. An element begins to bother me. It is impossible to place a quick release plate for photo or video tripod with another lens than the Panasonic 12-32 or 14. With the Olympus 17 mm, it is limit. Direction La Grand Bibliothèque de Paris behind my home.
I am surprised by the reactivity of the DMC-GM1. It is immediate. Faster than the DMC-GH3. The touch-sensitive screen is reactive too. Even too much. Take care where you put fingers. Too low on the screen, you modify the white balance without being careful. The screen glorifies the images but without betraying them really. What you see is what you will get …
Return at home. The editing is also simple as for the DMC-GH3. The audio dubbing is essential. The audio recording is mediocre. To use only indoor.
Now it just needs a nice case to carry the DMC-GM1. Enjoy your Panasonic.

Film Video Test Review on > http://vimeo.com/80144049

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 1 minute after posting
6 upvotes
Cal22
By Cal22 (5 months ago)

Hello,

maybe combined with its special grip you will be able to mount a quick release plate!

0 upvotes
Cal22
By Cal22 (5 months ago)

Sorry for giving you a wrong advice: Since the optional grip has no provision for a tripod mounting, it won't allow a quick release to be added.

0 upvotes
TonyinJapan
By TonyinJapan (5 months ago)

I have a Manfrotto Modopocket tripod attached to my GM1. It has an extension to connect another tripod mount when folded, and works with lenses which extend beyond the m43 mount of the GM1.

http://www.letsgodigital.org/en/18290/manfrotto-modopocket/

1 upvote
OneGuy
By OneGuy (5 months ago)

Surprisingly and pleasantly smooth. Ok, Piere, I was expecting a true French sample of existential poetry by a pretty woman. Fell in love with a cam?

0 upvotes
white shadow
By white shadow (5 months ago)

Check out the Canon HF DC2 mini high power flash.

You can attach it on the base of the GM1 to use it as an additional flash and you can still attach the whole combo on a tripod.

Comment edited 15 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Cal22
By Cal22 (5 months ago)

You want a quick release system for your GM1 (suitable also for bigger cameras)? The german firm Novoflex produces MiniConnect, which works with a relatively small disc at the camera's bottom. You can check it out by means of a 1Euro coin, the diameter of which comes very close to that of the MiniConnect disc.
But don't forget: Deciding on the GM1's optional grip is deciding against a quick release system. And vice versa.

0 upvotes
Hugo808
By Hugo808 (5 months ago)

Why would you buy a tiny P&S if you want to use a tripod? This little thing is obviously designed for casual snaps not serious work.

I'm getting one for Crimbo...

0 upvotes
AnalogJ
By AnalogJ (5 months ago)

Okay, I can see spending the money if one must have an interchangeable lens camera with 4:3 sensor. But as is, with a 3.5 lens,3:1 ratio zoom lens and no hot shoe, I'd still buy a LX7 with the LVF2 electronic viewfinder as an accessory. I've had the camera for about five months, and recently got the LVF2 to try out. With a 1.4 lens and 4:1 zoom ratio, it is allowing me to take some amazing photos. I'm not seeing, from the above samples, an appreciable difference with the GM1 and it's about 50% more than my camera combo. I just posted a gallery of photos in the Gallery section, most have been taken without the LVF2, but I'm finding I can be more precise with my composition with it.

3 upvotes
white shadow
By white shadow (5 months ago)

This camera is not for everybody. If you really need an EVF, you should buy the Lumix GX7 instead.

1 upvote
HSway
By HSway (5 months ago)

That the ultra small camera is liberating in a sense of creativity of its own kind would seem like carrying wood into the wood but trying sony nex6 these days makes that experience fresher. Impressed by the optical quality of the Touit 32/1.8 T* by the way. so much so that I can give up the range and stabilization for it and its speed. it also worked best with my d90 used as a 'compact' before.

1 upvote
JeanLucX
By JeanLucX (5 months ago)

I would buy it on the spot if it comes with hot shoe. I get it the GM1 is supposed to be small but it would be nice to add a viewfinder if I want to. Maybe the GM2 will have that like the RX100 II

1 upvote
photo perzon
By photo perzon (5 months ago)

of course. I've had the VF2 and now the VF4 for a year and never used it. I've had several cameras that took a hot shoe flash PL6, GR, Nikon A and not used it.

1 upvote
AnalogJ
By AnalogJ (5 months ago)

I don't know about you, but I'm finding that with the LVF2 on my LX7, I can much more precisely compose the photos. Perhaps my eyesight is what makes viewing a 3" LCD challenging to compose with compared to the large image in the LVF2, but I'm liking that extra size for detailed composition.

0 upvotes
Trollshavethebestcandy
By Trollshavethebestcandy (5 months ago)

If you add the 15mm Leica lens this will be a mini Sony RX1 proportions wise but the ability to change lenses. Would be cool to see them side by side. like this...
http://j.mp/18Un7xQ

2 upvotes
b craw
By b craw (5 months ago)

{if you are an expert - maybe something historically akin to someone wearing a tophat and monicle - you may wish to skip over my uncomfortably lengthy commentary involving things you already know}

But here is a little information for those less familiar with m4/3 or mirrorless cameras in general:

Panasonic and Olympus, having started the mirrorless category together with the m4/3 format, went two different directions initially - Panasonic opting for a compact SLR-esque body (G1) to hit the market first in 2008. While Panasonic explored this approach and soon after the compact rangefinder-style (I've never liked that description btw), Olympus invested everything initially in its compact PEN series. It was Olympus that received much of the attention for the decidedly classic looking small PEN's. So from the start the cachet of mirrorless has largely been size and aesthetics as balanced with performance. And though it was understood by the technical community that, in addition to lens interchangeability, these cameras had relatively large 4/3 sensors (multiple times larger than most point and shoots) and advanced live view capabilities, it was hard to communicate the whole package successfully to the average consumer. But a reasonable amount of success by both makers (particularly outside the US) did prove a tentative viability of tgese systems and lead to the entry of the small body APS-C sensor cameras, most notably Sony's NEX series. [Canon and Nikon sat on their thumbs hoping this would never grow beyond a niche market, then, noting the increasing interest released arguably weak mirrorless lines.]

For a while now the APS-C sensor mirrorless' have stolen the show a bit, understandably so with the impressively small body DSLR image quality cameras like the NEX's, and the super chic and handsome Fujifilm X series. Now, with the releases of full frame mirrorless cameras such as the Sony A7/A7R and the Canon Df as well as the high performing and stylish m4/3 Olympus OM-D E-M1 (who thought up that name?) and well-featured good image quality small and very small Panasonic Lumix GX7 and GM1, I think we are seeing something approximating maturation of mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras (CSC's, MILC's, EVIL's, DSLM's...whatever we call them). And I think the story is that from the standpoint of very high-end performance in modest size and weight cameras to reasonably impressive performance in super small packages, such as the GM1, they are primed to fulfill a wide range of needs. And this has always been the potential in the technology.

There is much hyperbole over mirrorless ultimately replacing DSLR's, but there are more than a few reasons that both will coexist for some time at least, perhaps always. [I see a lot of egos making claims they know they cannot guarantee.]

Although it can be confusing much of the time, this is a great time to be a photographer, casual or more serious. And the Panasonic Lumix GM1 - don't ask me how exactly - is emblematic of that.

5 upvotes
Shamael
By Shamael (5 months ago)

Canon Df ????

Comment edited 22 seconds after posting
1 upvote
b craw
By b craw (5 months ago)

Nikon Df.

0 upvotes
b craw
By b craw (5 months ago)

Sorry, as a DSLR it should not be listed as I did. I meant to come back and explain it in reference to pressures to create different types of DSLR bodies (retro, whatever) perhaps because of mirrorless experimentations with form. I screwed up.

Comment edited 10 minutes after posting
1 upvote
photo perzon
By photo perzon (5 months ago)

I went outdoors and took some pictures. At 12mm the lens looked OK. At 32mm it looked very sharp. Lest not forget you can put a 14mm 2.5 or a 20mm 1.7 or an Oly 45mm 1.8 on the GM1 and stay with primes.

0 upvotes
Marty4650
By Marty4650 (5 months ago)

While the GM1 is the smallest M4/3 made today, what I really find intriguing is the lens. I realize it is relatively slow, but that lens is so small that it will transform most M4/3 cameras into a very desirable walkaround shooter.

If the lens was sold separately for $250 or so... Panasonic couldn't make them fast enough to meet market demand.

13 upvotes
Black Box
By Black Box (5 months ago)

I thought it'd be an "I like it - I don't like it" kind of thing. But actually, I find this much more useful than the reviews. Real life experience is always better than lab coats.

Keep it up! Good idea!

5 upvotes
samhain
By samhain (5 months ago)

all I got from this is- it's small, and cute, and fits in my purse. Here's some photos.

1 upvote
Marty4650
By Marty4650 (5 months ago)

And... it will fit in the pocket of a lab coat.

1 upvote
67gtonr
By 67gtonr (5 months ago)

It seems to me that the Canon EOS M with its 22 f/2.0 lens would be better, it's roughly the same size with a better sensor, better screen, better built, providing better image quality and unlimited expansion possibilities, and it costs less!

2 upvotes
halfwaythere
By halfwaythere (5 months ago)

Ignorance is truly bliss.

14 upvotes
67gtonr
By 67gtonr (5 months ago)

You obviously speak from experience.

2 upvotes
olypan
By olypan (5 months ago)

Did you just fall out of a tree?

5 upvotes
bluevellet
By bluevellet (5 months ago)

Maybe the Canon EOS M 2 when it's finally out. If ever and is everything we wish it to be. Quite a bit bigger though.

But the plain old Canon EOS M? lol

6 upvotes
DT200
By DT200 (5 months ago)

EOS M and GM1 the same size? I guess you could claim they both focus in under 5 seconds too!

12 upvotes
Marty4650
By Marty4650 (5 months ago)

Yes, and this probably explains why Canon had to slash the price of the EOS M to $300, and why Panasonic is piling up preorders for the GM1 at $750.

Canon has done a lot of things right, but the EOS M isn't one of them.

7 upvotes
white shadow
By white shadow (5 months ago)

Canon just want to be seen joining the mirrorless world but is doing it half heartedly.

No built-in flash, no EVF and very slow autofocus. Fail very badly.

I doubt they will be serious even in the near future.

2 upvotes
inorogNL
By inorogNL (5 months ago)

"unlimited expansion possibilities" into DSLR?, do not get me wrong I'd take any camera brand that ticks my boxes, somehow I do not feel canon wants EOS M to be serious contender to other ~enthusiast compact cameras

1 upvote
Steven Ellingson
By Steven Ellingson (5 months ago)

halfway, olypan, bluevelvet, you have added nothing to the discussion and so I won't respond to your comments.
DT200: They aren't the same size, but they are pretty damn close:
http://camerasize.com/compact/#491.30,351.349,ha,t
For practical purposes, it's essentially the same. Too bulky to fit comfortably in a jeans pocket, but easily fits in a jacket pocket.
Marty: This is a terrible argument. And it's funny because I see a lot of Canon fans making arguments like this all the time. I suppose you also think that Transformers: Dark of the moon is one of the greatest films of all time?
Shadow:
Flash: Personally, I'd rather have the hotshoe, but I'm probably in the minority on that.
EVF: neither does the EM1.....
Autofocus: I'll give you that one. But personally I find it to be more than adequate with the firmware update.
inorog: who cares what canon wants? Look at the camera itself and make your decision.
At launch, the M was a mess. With new firmware and price, it is a bargain.

1 upvote
Moofish
By Moofish (5 months ago)

You picked a specific angle to make them seem similar...but they are not: http://j.mp/1aW5fT3
EOS M: 109 x 66 x 32 mm
GM1: 99 x 55 x 30 mm

0 upvotes
67gtonr
By 67gtonr (5 months ago)

Those measurements indicate that they are "roughly" the same size, ie. the EM1 is not smaller in any significant way than the EOS M.

0 upvotes
mfj197
By mfj197 (5 months ago)

The GM1 is significantly smaller than the EOS M. From the top there's not too much in it, but the EOS is much taller. It is also 1.5 times the weight of the GM1. And when you say better sensor, better screen, better built, providing better image quality and unlimited expansion possibilities - I'm not sure any of those are correct.

0 upvotes
oohaah
By oohaah (4 months ago)

Are you trying to create "the most replied post"?

1 upvote
Frank_BR
By Frank_BR (5 months ago)

The best perfumes come in small bottles...

1 upvote
davids8560
By davids8560 (5 months ago)

Just curious. Were there any similar cameras from the film days of yesteryear? Tiny, high-quality film cameras?

0 upvotes
junyo
By junyo (5 months ago)

Lots of photographers used to carry the Oly Stylus Epic as a pocket camera.

1 upvote
Samuel Dilworth
By Samuel Dilworth (5 months ago)

Heinz Waaske’s Rollei 35, in its many variations.
Minox 35.
The Contax T-series cameras.
Minolta TC-1.
Yashica T3, T4, and T5 models.
Olympus μ[mju:]-II (Stylus Epic).
Leica Minilux and CM.
Ricoh GR1, GR1s, GR10, GR21, and GR1v.
Nikon 28Ti and 35Ti.
Fujifilm compacts including the Klasse and Natura models.
Konica Big Mini.

Plus many other quirky, less known cameras. High-quality compacts thrived in the film era, though they wouldn’t all be considered compact by today’s incredibly small digital standards. There were also several relatively compact, high-end rangefinder systems towards the end of the film era, e.g. Contax G, Hexar RF, Cosina Voigtländer Bessa, Leica M, etc.

In those days great ideas were more likely to get manufactured, often by smaller companies. Now, with digital, only giants can compete – and giants are traditionally conservative and Japanese, so endless iteration is the name of the game. In this context, the GM1 is wildly innovative, for which I’m thankful.

10 upvotes
Le Frog
By Le Frog (5 months ago)

Several fixed lens rangefinders (eg Rollei35, Minox 35, Yashica Electro 35, Olympus RD, RC, SP, XA, XA4, EPIC, Canon ELPH), but only one with interchangeable lenses (two, if you count the PENs): the Pentax 110.

1 upvote
Marty4650
By Marty4650 (5 months ago)

David,

The Minolta CLE was a real jewel.

The Olympus XA was really nice too.

4 upvotes
Shamael
By Shamael (5 months ago)

Rollei 35 in FF digital, woooowwww.

1 upvote
samhain
By samhain (5 months ago)

Yashica t4, T5, Leica cm, Nikon 35ti probably the best of the tiny p&s.
Go a little bigger and the Konica Hexar af is, imo, the boss of p&s.

2 upvotes
millardmt
By millardmt (5 months ago)

The coolest one was a twin lens reflex -- the Swiss "Tessina 35." 2.5" X 2.0" X 1.0". Spring-driven motor drive. Marvelous!

However, to be comparable, you ought to look at the Italian half-frame "Ducati Sogno" rangefinder. It's a little bigger, but it's a true system camera, with interchangeable lenses and a zillion accessories.

Marc

1 upvote
davids8560
By davids8560 (5 months ago)

Thanks for the information! I would like to see pictures of these cameras and more info about how they worked!.

0 upvotes
Septuagent2
By Septuagent2 (5 months ago)

Anyone who can understand the menu of a digital camera is a genius - ego - Allison Johnson is a genius. Do they make a digital version of a box brownie ?

1 upvote
Deleted pending purge
By Deleted pending purge (5 months ago)

Yes. Any camera set to "A".

1 upvote
gonzalobroto
By gonzalobroto (5 months ago)

Insightful comments, Allison.The reasons you list are exactly the same reasons why I intend to buy this camera: I want it to come with me wherever I go, almost as an invisible companion. As much as I love my "bigger" camera, I wanna complement it with something small and portable for all those moments when you are not consciously out shooting. Photographic eyes never rest!

gonzalobroto.blogspot.com

2 upvotes
alolywu
By alolywu (5 months ago)

I like the size and idea of carrying a camera wherever you go but isn't what the smart phone is for? The IQ coming out of the iPhones and Android phones are pretty amazing and is ready to be shared instantly unlike the GM1.

I keep flipping back and forth between the two.

2 upvotes
Cal22
By Cal22 (5 months ago)

Be honest, Allison, it's the look of the GM1 you couldn't withstand; that's why it's your Gear of the Year! This tiny thing is like a gem that wakes desire, isn't it?

The GM1 is the beauty queen of the compacts - and yet it allows interchangeable lenses. These technical features it houses are impressive indeed, but will it keep what it promises? Will this small camera prove fiddly when it comes to shooting? Is it prone to shake because it's a lightweight? Many customers will likely be happy with a GM1 as a point and shoot only. But Panasonic should not ignore the needs of serious photographers and therefore improve the camera if necessary. An optional (silver?) EVF would be nice, too.

8 upvotes
stevens37y
By stevens37y (5 months ago)

Why would it shake? It has an electronic 1st curtain + stepping motor 2nd curtain shutter. No spring mechanics. A light camera is always better.

Comment edited 37 seconds after posting
1 upvote
kadardr
By kadardr (5 months ago)

Yes, this little gem is cute. You can keep the kit zoom and buy one or two more Olympus primes. For that price you could also have a Nikon d3200 or a Canon Rebel System (with 3 lenses).

0 upvotes
Cal22
By Cal22 (5 months ago)

stevens37y:
Read the Olympus E-P5 review: Image Quality, Camera/Image shake! I also remember a review of a Panasonic camera that had its problems with image blürring caused by the kit lens.

The miniaturization of a system camera is a wonderful thing. Camera reviews should find out whether there is a price to pay in form of handling and image issues.

0 upvotes
Marty4650
By Marty4650 (5 months ago)

For "serious shooters".... Panasonic has the GX7. Complete with a very nice tiltable EVF build right in.

But I think the GM1 is also a serious camera, because it really is possible to take great photos without any sort of EVF or OVF.

Panasonic has filled a niche nicely with the GM1. This is an ideal camera for some folks, and an ideal second camera for others. It will take up very little room in a camera bag alongside a DSLR, and become a great option when you don't feel like taking your D800E to a party and being the camera geek.

And you still get to come home with some pretty nice photos.

1 upvote
millardmt
By millardmt (5 months ago)

"Be honest, Allison, it's the look of the GM1 you couldn't withstand; that's why it's your Gear of the Year! This tiny thing is like a gem that wakes desire, isn't it? [...] The GM1 is the beauty queen of the compacts - and yet it allows interchangeable lenses. [...] But Panasonic should not ignore the needs of serious photographers ..."
===================================

Having spent my career at a large, urban university, I've learned to HATE, LOATHE & DESPISE any kind of admonition about "political correctness." But in this case, were I Allison, I suspect I'd find your comments to be both sexist and condescending. I've no doubt that all of the DPR writers are more than a little jaded, having as they do to read the never-ending drivel posted by so many photo "enthusiasts" (myself included), but even so, how would you like to "hang it out there a little," expressing something about your personal preferences, only to have to read a response such as yours?

Comment edited 58 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Cal22
By Cal22 (5 months ago)

millardmt: Your kind of reaction on my comments is a little weird, in my view!

The GM1 has not yet been reviewed, the tiny zoom either. What makes Allison prefer this camera as her Gear of the Year, anyway? 'It fits easily in my purse', she writes, 'it fits into my life!. She has found a companion to take pictures with 'on an everyday basis'. I strongly support such personal and practical view!
There's still a question: Why not a RX100 II or a E-PM2 or ..? I suspect, Allison stands for many of us (incl. me) who are attracted by the wonderful appearance of this new camera. There's nothing wrong with it. Panasonic is successfully changing the scene with a GM1 that turns out to be a wooing little thing indeed.

Allison is not selling her DSLR and stepping over to the Panasonic system; she keeps her DSLR. Her decision for the GM1 as a second camera is not suitable for anyone. More information and a camera review might help others to make a decision. That's what DPReview is for, isn't it?

0 upvotes
HappyVan
By HappyVan (5 months ago)

BTW, looking for a small camera?

The little known Nikon S1 (similar size and weight) is selling for $299. The lens isn't IS unfortunately.

However, it does allow the use of F-mount lenses with an adapter.

Enjoy

2 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (5 months ago)

Right, and with F-mount lenses and adapter it is huge, and IQ is well below m43.

10 upvotes
grumpycat
By grumpycat (5 months ago)

You mean that 1" sensor?

5 upvotes
HappyVan
By HappyVan (5 months ago)

For grumpycat,

Don't be a snob. It makes nice 18x12. For some people, that's good enough and at the right price.

BTW, Pany is still selling the old sensors in the GF6!

For peeve,

Add a 85mm 1.8 for reach, and its incredibly light and cheap.

Be positive. Every tool has its strengths.

1 upvote
rfsIII
By rfsIII (5 months ago)

I find it very interesting that so many people now say they need to buy two camera systems, one for "serious" shooting and one for casual shooting as though you could split the two.

But my real question is whether this is a genuine need or something that we've been coaxed into believing by the camera industry. And why? Isn't one system enough? Presuming you're not a full-time professional, what is the unfulfilled psychological need we're addressing by owning two camera systems rather than one? I love new gear, and love that we have so many choices, but this seems excessive.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
7 upvotes
white shadow
By white shadow (5 months ago)

Welcome to the world of materialism. It started after WW2 and do not seem to end soon.

Some say it is enriching our lives while others think it is destroying life in the long term. Look at all the wastage and how it is fuelling our greed for more. Life on earth will eventially pay for it. Climate change and all the pollution is real.

6 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (5 months ago)

and there are some men who want four wives.

7 upvotes
T3
By T3 (5 months ago)

Do you just have one pair of shoes? (Okay, maybe you do. But a lot of us do have different pairs of shoes for different occasions.)

I really don't think there's anything wrong with having different cameras for different applications or different scenarios. For example, if you're just going around town, do you really want to lug around a big DSLR? What's wrong with having a lighter, more compact alternative?

And frankly, I started realizing this "need" years ago. But it's only fairly recently that camera manufacturers have finally introduced products that fit the need. So, no, I don't think it's a case of the camera industry coaxing us into believing we need these cameras. I think it's the other way around: the camera industry finally listening to consumers, rather than flooding the market with more me-too DSLRs (or more tiny-sensored P&S cameras) and shoving those cameras down our throats.

11 upvotes
digitall
By digitall (5 months ago)

By T3 ...

"Do you just have one pair of shoes? (Okay, maybe you do. But a lot of us do have different pairs of shoes for different occasions.) "

You mean you have a pair with a camera mounted on them?

2 upvotes
Felix E Klee
By Felix E Klee (5 months ago)

I don't understand: Cameras normally have just one shoe, if at all. I've never seen one with a pair. ;-)

7 upvotes
Nikon2011
By Nikon2011 (5 months ago)

a dslr and all that comes with it is too heavy for funny-family-relaxing-quick moving time

i do believe tech industry is playing bad with all the gadgets : phones tablets computers smart watches etc

0 upvotes
hydrospanner
By hydrospanner (5 months ago)

Simply put, if I'm making the theoretical leap to saying I "need" any camera at all, then yes, there is a "need", in my use, for a second camera.

My SLR system gives me every option imaginable, and is adaptable, customizable, and as a system, I can upgrade it to keep current with modern technological improvements. It's anything and everything I need it to be as far as photographic capabilities.

The one thing I can't do with it is put it in a pocket. Taking my system with me requires planning and certain necessities to accommodate it. This simple drawback of size is what splits my photography needs, not serious/casual. It's the difference between planning to make photography the main purpose, and having a capable camera available.

That's where an advanced compact or light system comes in for many people...it's filling a need just like a specialty lens.

You wouldn't say "Why get a macro lens? The camera industry is telling you you need it." Same goes for a small camera.

2 upvotes
pictureAngst
By pictureAngst (5 months ago)

It's essential that I always have two camera systems at any time - one for using when I'm out and about, and the other on eBay.

1 upvote
Marty4650
By Marty4650 (5 months ago)

I don't know.... it just depends.

Some people are happy with just one camera, because it works, and they don't mind using it for everything.

But there are others, myself included, who like having more than one, since some designs are better suited than others for some things.

If you have the interest and the means, then you might want to own a DSLR, a MILC system camera, a high end compact, a superzoom camera, and perhaps even a rugged water proof camera.

Remember, these are just tools. Which is why they make more than one type of screwdriver, and more than one sort of hammer.

0 upvotes
Neodp
By Neodp (5 months ago)

One day perhaps the m43 sensor will be better than the best APS-C sensors today. That day, is not today. I can not abide the water color smeary noise at 1:1, at real world lighting (including shadows in any contrasting light) high IOS's. I'd say the goal is zero noise; at ISO 3200. This camera is way over priced. It's fine lenses are also way overpriced, comparatively (think 35mm Nikkor AF-S). I'm all for better carry sizes(and pocket camera progression); but it's just not worth it, now.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
8 upvotes
T3
By T3 (5 months ago)

"I can not abide the water color smeary noise at 1:1"

Well, ask yourself how often you view a photo "at 1:1" in the real world? Real photos are not viewed at 1:1. In fact, the best photos in the world, the most iconic ones, the great ones, aren't going to look very good "at 1:1" either, especially the ones that were shot on film! So I really think people should just get away from obsessive pixel peeping and get back to what real photography is about: being there, with a camera, to capture a moment. Real photography isn't about sitting in front of a computer anally pixel peeping images "at 1:1". Well, ok, maybe that's what photography is to *you*. But I think a lot of people are finally getting past that distorted notion of photography.

I think pixel peeping at 1:1 was very valuable in the earlier days of digital cameras. But these days, that obsessive practice has diminishing returns, and is less of an indicator of how an image will look when viewed normally than ever before.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 7 minutes after posting
21 upvotes
c_henry
By c_henry (5 months ago)

I've not used an APS-C sensor that I can say is definitively better than the newer m43 models. I have an X100s and an E-M5 and don't notice any discernible difference in IQ below ISO 3200 between them.

4 upvotes
MrWalrusGumboot
By MrWalrusGumboot (5 months ago)

So don't buy one...

2 upvotes
MJ Jones
By MJ Jones (5 months ago)

@T3. Well, not sure. Pixel peeping or at least large decent crops will be more needed now the screen resolutions are (finally) improving. Apple started the move with the iMac 27. Windows hardware makers were slow to follow but now all have such a screen in their catalogue and the prices are falling. In 5 years or so, 4K TV (3840x2160) might well also get mainstream. To cater for this type of crop, 24 Megapixel cams won't be a luxury.

So what will the smartphone images look like on such devices? Like the tiny black pix of my grandparents whose face I can't even see properly with a magnifying glass.
I wouldn't mind using a smartphone to take an unsignificant pic on the spur of the moment. But I certainly would not for travel in areas where I might never return again. And I do hope young parents shoot their kids at different age with decent gear for their memory books.

0 upvotes
Marty4650
By Marty4650 (5 months ago)

The best 4/3 sensor will never be better than the best APS-C sensor since both use the same technology, and there are advantages that come with a larger sensor.

The real question isn't "which is better" but "which ones are good enough for your needs?"

Even though the APS-C sensor does better when bench tested, for all practical purposes the 4/3 sensor is now good enough for the vast majority of users. And in time.... the 1" sensor will probably be good enough too.

4 upvotes
Shamael
By Shamael (5 months ago)

the 4/3 can never be better, he is just a cropped part of the apsc-sensor, like the 16 mpix Oly sensor is just a fraction of the 24 mpix sensor of Sony, same pixel pitch and density, thus same picture quality with same lens and timing. What differs is DOF, the smaller a sensor gets, the wider the depth of field gets, and 4/3 has deeper field depth than APSC or FF. At FF you get shallower DOF, but on the end, each of those sensors has his advantages. In tourism use, where you want more sharpness all over, a 4/3 is better to be used than a FF. Best is to have cameras with different sensor sizes, with that you can do all, sharpness all over, or shallow dof and huge bokeh. At decent sizes, like 3x4 inches print, you won't see the picture quality difference, but you'll see the DOF, and that is all what makes the difference in some way. It is not important what you have, what is important is what you do with it, and that use determines your choice.

1 upvote
whtchocla7e
By whtchocla7e (5 months ago)

I like the idea of such a camera but it's still a far cry from my favorite Olympus XA. I suppose I can continue waiting a bit longer for the digital XA...

3 upvotes
Neodp
By Neodp (5 months ago)

Bring on the XB (digital)!!!! XA-D? XA-M? XA!

My XA is the deal; for a pocket film camera. Digital needs that.

Rangefinder (focus). Inexpensive.
Even OVF; if cost is an issue.
35mm (focal) FULL FRAME f/2.8, closes mostly flat; with built-in lens cover/ON switch.
State of the art, Full frame sensor, and digital screen on back.
Removable, hidden, wireless remote (bright, optional diffuse-able)flash; with it's own battery pack!
All controls, and features, as balanced, and not stupid.

Stellar video; not missing full control, stabilization, and stereo jacks(head phones and mic, duh).

Comment edited 5 times, last edit 14 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Neodp
By Neodp (5 months ago)

ZA?

...and F-Zuiko, F meaning the 6 element magic lens.

If you do not know, all this would be very pocket-able.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
rpm40
By rpm40 (5 months ago)

We definitely won't be getting a full frame digital XA, but I would take a look at an updated version with, say, a 4/3 sensor and 35mm eq f1.8. Make it a cheaper, smaller, and simpler x100.

0 upvotes
Martin.au
By Martin.au (5 months ago)

This could be an amusingly sneaky "camera of the year".

2 upvotes
fishywishy
By fishywishy (5 months ago)

i dont get people being excited about the size. no way that fits in a pocket, so who cares if its 1 cm shorters?

5 upvotes
bzzz
By bzzz (5 months ago)

For some people, weight might matter as much as size depending on how you are carrying it. For example, Allison Johnson keeps the camera in her purse. I carry my compact camera on a waistpack for running/hiking outdoors, which is how my camera is carried almost 100% of the time. The pockets in my running shorts are useless for any camera, so as long as I have a good way to secure it on/in a waist pack, weight matters more. The GM1 with the compact zoom is 274g, which similar to and actually slightly less than Sony RX-100 II (281 g).

Comment edited 20 seconds after posting
5 upvotes
white shadow
By white shadow (5 months ago)

Can't disagree with bzzz. The GM1 is just too cute and sexy to ignor. Its probably the best "carry anywhere" camera so far with very decent image quality.

3 upvotes
ThePhilips
By ThePhilips (5 months ago)

Not every camera can be the RX100 or LF1.

Especially not the ILC.

But smaller the cameras get, more pockets of more people they can fit.

1 upvote
Steven Ellingson
By Steven Ellingson (5 months ago)

No it won't fit comfortably in a jeans pocket. (I have actually walked around with the slightly larger EOS M in my jeans. It fit, but I looked kind of stupid.) But it fits a little bit better than its peers in lots of places. Jacket pockets, purses, side pockets of bags, glove compartments...

0 upvotes
TonyinJapan
By TonyinJapan (5 months ago)

Allison writes about the experience of having a high-quality camera with you at all times, but not being conscious of it at all, which is something I can attest to. You are not photo conscious at all times because you don’t have the weight or size to remind you. Having the GM1 in my work bag for the past few days, I have forgotten it is actually there, but then I think: I actually have a camera with an m43 sensor in my bag if I want to take great photos on a similar level to my EM-5 (which is at home), even as wide as 24mm eq., which, to me, is what this camera is all about.

Some reviewer mentioned the Sony RX1 is a great camera to take out on a family holiday to take highest quality snaps of your trip without the burden of a DSLR. I think the GM1 is similar to the RX1 but shrunken to an even smaller scale for those who want even more portability and be even less conspicuous when taking shots. (with faster AF too). People being shot really think you are using a standard P&S cam.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
white shadow
By white shadow (5 months ago)

The GM1 with its tiny size would be a great backup camera for the Oly OMD-EM1. This will be the best travel photographer combo. Use the EM1 for those situation when one require reasonable fast tracking focus, walking in the rain or snow and when an EVF is essential. Use the GM1 when going to a pub or restaurant in the evening or to an art gallery where cameras are usually ban.

One would be able to get both for about the same price of the Sony RX1.

1 upvote
T3
By T3 (5 months ago)

Looks like a great camera for those of us who don't want to lug around a DSLR everywhere, but still want the flexibility of a decent sized sensor and some lens options/interchangeability. There's definitely a time and place for a DSLR, but come on people, you don't need to take your DSLR everywhere. These days, seeing someone lug a DSLR into a restaurant or at a party just looks silly and dorky, especially when there are good alternatives now available.

2 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (5 months ago)

the small size is great, and quite obvious.

however, it's the shutter that makes this camera unique.

5 upvotes
Richard Murdey
By Richard Murdey (5 months ago)

Make no mistake, the GM1 is small. For hilarity, go to camerasize.com and compare against a Nikon D4. O_o

More to the point though, its functionally the same size as a Pentax Q7 .. essentially erasing the desirability of the latter. Once the price settles down to the $400 range, as it surely will, the relevancy of the Nikon V2 and Sony RX100ii also fall into question.

1 upvote
rtogog
By rtogog (5 months ago)

1. I thought with Nikon 1 still relevant, especially who built their Nikon DSLR system. They can use Nikon tele-lenses for creating extra long focal length, but for most first buyer will not interesting.
2. This camera is not really pocketable compared with Sony RX100II. They need more compact n dedicated lenses for this Lumix GM series.

2 upvotes
Richard Murdey
By Richard Murdey (5 months ago)

@rtogog Uh, what are you talking about? Sony RX100 is larger than the M1. Any dimension you care to talk about, its not even close!

1 upvote
rtogog
By rtogog (5 months ago)

@ Richards,
It is true the body is smaller, but when you attached its lens on it become bigger (volumetric).
Pls, refer this size comparison, http://www.photographyblog.com/news/panasonic_gm1_v_sony_rx100/

BTW,This camera is worth to be included in the DPReview gear of the year.

2 upvotes
Tonkotsu Ramen
By Tonkotsu Ramen (5 months ago)

The Rx100 is more shallow by over half an inch. That's the difference between fitting into my jeans, and not fitting into my jeans.

0 upvotes
Drofnad
By Drofnad (4 months ago)

"compare to the D4" :: !!! Yes, I did that, too --and it's like the yacht & a dingy towed by it! As others note, though, re overall size, one mustn't ignore the lenses : some primes keep an overall small size but at the expense of FL variety of course (vs. RX100). But, for those who have invested in M4/3 gear, this tiny body can be a nice complement.

0 upvotes
b craw
By b craw (5 months ago)

Thanks, Allison. I enjoyed the testimonial/narrative approach to explainating your fondness of this camera. Cameras, as we all should be reminded of, are tools within a context; their values are not completely measured in hairsplitting over high ISO image quality, frames shot per second, and flash sync speeds.

2 upvotes
Russell Evans
By Russell Evans (5 months ago)

I setup the camerasize.com webpage with the GM1 and Sony Nex-3n on it and asked my wife which one she would like. She indicated the GM1 and said, "of coarse that one, as it has that old camera look". I then told her the GM1 is US $750 and the other is US $450. She then said the looks weren't $300 more important. I asked her about size and she replied she is happy with the 5n with the Sony 16-50mm she has now, and the little bit smaller camera isn't really enough smaller to interest her.

I have to admit I like the looks of the GM1, but even with my small hands, really small for a guy, I find the 5n too small and have to have a half case on it to have it be somewhat comfortable for me. My wife likes it without the case, of coarse. I also looked to find photos of the 3n with a half case on it, and that look is almost as attractive as the GM1 to me.

Crazy, after all that, I still would like to buy my wife the GM1. I might not be stylish, but my wife is still pretty hip and happening.

2 upvotes
Richard Shih
By Richard Shih (5 months ago)

Admittedly I have not shot extensively with the GM1 like Allison has, but my first reaction upon seeing and holding it for the first time was, "Really? They made it that small?!"

Sizing it up on camerasize.com is one thing; holding it in your hands is something completely else. It may be too small for "serious" photo work or, as Allison puts it, "Going Shooting", but my sore shoulder wins out over my cramped hands when walking around with non-serious photography.

And then when you factor in that you're not sacrificing sensor size (didn't say image quality, as I haven't scrutinized the photos) it's really amazing what they've done.

8 upvotes
Russell Evans
By Russell Evans (5 months ago)

I can't really tell the difference between the 274g / 0.6 pounds of the GM1, (I actually used just the 5n without a lens mounted, 269g), on my shoulder and 385g / 0.8 pounds, (the 3n and 5n with the 16-50mm weigh the same) on my shoulder. I can't really tell the difference all the way up to 461g / 1 pound of a Nex-6 with the 16-50mm. I can kind of tell the difference with the 960g / 2.1 pound of my weather sealed DSLR with weather sealed kit lens mounted. I'm not however, about to complain about the DSLR being heavy when my 5 foot 2 inch, 100 pound, wife carries around a 4.5 pound / 2041g purse everywhere she goes. Four ounces in weight savings in her purse might mean something to her though.

Comment edited 4 times, last edit 5 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
SDPharm
By SDPharm (5 months ago)

> my sore shoulder wins out over my cramped hands when walking around with non-serious photography….

Non-conspicuous cameras are important tools for street photographers and photojournalists. I wouldn't call their work non-serious.

1 upvote
white shadow
By white shadow (5 months ago)

Russel Evans, you are a good man thinking about your wife and planning to buy her a GM1. I am sure she would appreciate it. The 5n with the 16-50mm lens is just a bit too big for a small handbag.

You have an interesting collection of photos in your flickr account. I like the one taken of a statue of an elephant holding a man. Where was this taken?

If one find it too small to hold, just attach a Manfrotto table-top tripod on its base and hold it like a lollypop. It will come in handy for those low light situation too.

1 upvote
Russell Evans
By Russell Evans (5 months ago)

The statue is part of the Magic Gardens in Philadelphia. I'm not sure how you would describe the place, art, junk, madness, OCD, vision, ugly, beautiful, obscene, sacrilegious, mystical, ... You definitely step into the mind of someone else when you visit and you aren't walking on solid ground. Like a physical dream maybe.

http://www.phillymagicgardens.org/

0 upvotes
FrankS009
By FrankS009 (5 months ago)

The GM1 looks like a great camera to me, especially with the grip. With the GX7 a little bigger, the GM1 is the true successor to the GF1. Am looking forward to both the GM1 and GX7.

F.

1 upvote
udris
By udris (5 months ago)

Guys, pockets are for playing pocket billiards........

3 upvotes
udris
By udris (5 months ago)

Gotta love the comments about pockets when Allison's joy is that it fits nicely in her purse.

3 upvotes
lester11
By lester11 (5 months ago)

Nice! Going Shooting, capital G capital S. Yup, the E-M5 is round my neck and the backpack is full of lenses and I've got my Goretex on and yup, I'm Goin' Shootin'. Now when I'm not Going Shooting, I'll be in my suit and tie mainly, and I really really want to have something unobtrusive but good in my jacket pocket. Darn it, I don't think I have what it takes to pop a Cath Kidson handbag on my arm...

1 upvote
Le Frog
By Le Frog (5 months ago)

I will pass the suit and tie part, because we seem to be the only ones in this forum acknowledging dress code as an issue (when I was 25 I did not mind having a drink at the Closerie des Lilas in tweeds, a tie, and a bag full of gear on the table, but those days are over). But you must be more fit than I am! There is no way I can carry a backpack full of lenses on the trail (just a bottle of water, a snack, a light sweater, an 8" tablet, a couple of cigars, keys, wallet, smartphone, ipod, and a pocketable camera - and I still prefer to distribute the weight in the pockets of my Barbour and my cargo pants).

0 upvotes
Richard Shih
By Richard Shih (5 months ago)

I carried a 5D2 and 24-70 f/2.8L while climbing a mountain, and besides the fact that it was inaccessible in my pack most of the time going up, I would've loved something that was 4lbs lighter...

5 upvotes
akul60
By akul60 (5 months ago)

I was interested in this camera, but in the end, two things stopped me and I went with RX100

The two things that I was concerned are

1. Electronic shutter - how often do you get jello cam?

2. Flash Sync at 1/50 is rather useless for fill-in flash use.

4 upvotes
Daniel Lauring
By Daniel Lauring (5 months ago)

Yes, don't understand the insanely slow 1/50th flash sync speed...result of the electronic shutter?

0 upvotes
JamesVo
By JamesVo (5 months ago)

The Nikon D70 had flash sync at 1/500th with an electronic shutter - all those years ago! So I can't see why this camera's flash function is hobbled

0 upvotes
Samuel Dilworth
By Samuel Dilworth (5 months ago)

It’s not the electronic first-curtain but the mechanical second-curtain that limits the GM1’s flash-synch speed.

The GM1’s second curtain is driven by a stepper motor, which means the curtain moves far slower than in a conventional spring-driven shutter (I’m mildly surprised it’s feasible at all to drive a shutter curtain with a stepper motor). That limits the fastest mechanical shutter speed to 1/500 s and the flash synch to 1/50 s.

On the plus side, by eliminating the mechanical first-curtain and the clockwork of a conventional shutter, the GM1’s shutter is truly tiny (about 1/5th the size of the GF5 shutter assembly!), allowing the camera to be as small as it is – particularly its low height.

2 upvotes
Philly
By Philly (5 months ago)

This is a very surprising recommendation from the same reviewer who wrote the "First Impression" on GM1. If you look at that "First Impression", it was very negative:

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/panasonic-lumix-dmc-gm1/7

with only the camera's negatives highlighted. What changed?

0 upvotes
bluevellet
By bluevellet (5 months ago)

She actually gave it a chance after fiddling 5 minutes with the freshly out-of-the-box camera?

3 upvotes
Andy Westlake
By Andy Westlake (5 months ago)

@ Philly: I think you should re-read the final paragraph on the page you linked.

1 upvote
Philly
By Philly (5 months ago)

Hi Andy: yes, I did read the last paragraph. It even starts off by saying that "we don't want to be too negative". But I do acknowledge the positive comments about the camera being "cute" and a "feat of engineering". To me, the overall message was that the camera may be cute and a feat of engineering, but to what end? The "positive" points served as a foil to highlight the negatives, I thought.

I'm somewhat agnostic towards the GM1, but I just thought the "gear of the year" recommendation seemed much at odds with what was written in the "first impression", that's all. Thanks.

4 upvotes
ThePhilips
By ThePhilips (5 months ago)

@Philly, it's old news. DPR is pretty cold to the Panasonic brand. Not much we readers can do if they do not like the brand.

0 upvotes
inorogNL
By inorogNL (5 months ago)

The grip design is simply brilliant!

1 upvote
T3
By T3 (5 months ago)

Now I just want someone to make a third-party knock-off for half the price. $100 for the grip is a bit steep. But that's OEM for you.

0 upvotes
white shadow
By white shadow (5 months ago)

Just attach a Manfrotto table-top tripod on its base and hold it like a lollypop. Great to have it during low light situation as well.

That would probably cost you less than $100 and more useful for photography overall.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Marty4650
By Marty4650 (5 months ago)

T3... it is just a matter of time before someone in China is selling them on ebay for $9.95. With shipping included.

Be patient.

0 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (5 months ago)

Might as well get a smart phone instead, those are more useful and on occasion you can also use one for those to make/receive phone calls.

2 upvotes
Jimmy jang Boo
By Jimmy jang Boo (5 months ago)

Tell that to Allison...

I bet she has a smart phone and that by comparison it is crap, very limited and not half as fun.

5 upvotes
The Jacal
By The Jacal (5 months ago)

Jimmy, don't feed the massive troll.

8 upvotes
caver3d
By caver3d (5 months ago)

As Sergeant Hulka said: "Lighten up, Francis."

5 upvotes
Jimmy jang Boo
By Jimmy jang Boo (5 months ago)

Blunty did a very interesting comparison between GM1 and the Pentax Q7. The results are *very* interesting and NOT what many might suspect...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ShVUGNOe2gE

Comment edited 45 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
ThePhilips
By ThePhilips (5 months ago)

Yes, I've seen it. The thing is, in most of his scenarios, a good smartphone would have performed just as good. That's how good some smartphone cams have gotten. But if you get out of the comfort zone more often than Blunty, then both Pentax Q and smartphones would start showing IQ degradation sooner. (Or later, if you would first hit the subjects unsuited for the e-shutter of the GM1.)

1 upvote
davids8560
By davids8560 (5 months ago)

I would like to see more weatherproofed MILC's. I mean, "high quality, take everywhere cameras" they say - that is, unless it's cold or it's rainy!

I'm pretty sure Olympus has a couple of weatherproofed MILC's, but I think none of the lenses are. And Nikon has one. Correct me if I'm wrong!

Isn't environmental sealing a fairly easy feature to add to a camera? All those little rugged compact cameras on the market right now might be tough, but every last one of them lacks the photographic power of a camera like this little camera.

I think environmental sealing would appeal to a lot of people. A tough little camera that's a real photographic tool, not a point-and-shoot.

Comment edited 5 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
1 upvote
deep7
By deep7 (5 months ago)

Olympus makes at least two m4/3 lenses which are weatherproof. It also provides a weatherproof adaptor which can be used with weatherproof 4/3 lenses.

0 upvotes
bluevellet
By bluevellet (5 months ago)

Panasonic GH3 is also weatherproof.

0 upvotes
Mike Ronesia
By Mike Ronesia (5 months ago)

The M4/3 system has at least 3 bodies and 4 lenses that are weather proof.

1 upvote
pdelux
By pdelux (5 months ago)

Em5, Em1, GH3 bodies

lenses - Olympus 12-50, 12-40, 60mm Macro, + all HG and SHG 4/3 lenses
panasonic: 12-35, 35-100

3 upvotes
bluevellet
By bluevellet (5 months ago)

60mm macro lens is also weather-sealed.

0 upvotes
Almeida
By Almeida (5 months ago)

Is that a GM1 or you are happy to see me?

11 upvotes
Tonkotsu Ramen
By Tonkotsu Ramen (5 months ago)

Hey Allison,

This is the exact article I was looking for. Since you've had the sony RX100II, can I ask you a question on portability?

I'm looking for a replacement for my Canon S90, and initially, I wanted a Sony RX100II.... But then this camera came out..

Just a few questions:

What is the shot-to-shot time of this camera? The RX100II is very fast, .4 seconds between pics, so you can take two pics in one second if necessary without turning on its continuous mode. Can this camera meet or beat that time?

Is there a wifi option to transfer files to my smart phone?

Now, with the 12-32mm or 20mm, will this fit in a hoodie sweater pocket? jacket pocket? adidas sports jacket pocket? or fit into cargo shorts pockets?

If it meets or beats all of the above requests, then it would seem like a better pocket cam than the RX100II.

Thank You.

1 upvote
Allison Johnson
By Allison Johnson (5 months ago)

Hello,

Haven't done a lot of formal testing yet with the GM1 as far as timings go but just in casual use it seems like the GM1 is a little faster, but the buffer needs more time to clear. I can get 3 shots very quickly, but it varies after that. The RX100 II is just a hair slower (again, in a very casual test) but lets me shoot more frames without needing to clear the buffer. The GM1 does have WiFi.

With the 12-32 or 20mm the GM1 will fit into bigger pockets like an outdoor jacket or hoodie. The RX100 II is slimmer and might fit a bit more comfortably, since either lens on the GM1 protrudes a bit more. They weigh about the same. Hope that's helpful! We're working on a full review.

1 upvote
Tonkotsu Ramen
By Tonkotsu Ramen (5 months ago)

Thanks Allison!

I'm pretty torn between these two cameras. On one hand, you have better pocketablility, flexible lcd, and battery life w/ the RX100II..

but you have significantly better IQ but less pocketability and significantly worse battery life w/ the GM1.. sigh..

If you could, either in a reply to this post or as part of the full review, tell us why u chose the GM1 over the RX100 in detail please?. Thanks!

0 upvotes
white shadow
By white shadow (5 months ago)

Capable, versatile and cute. The RX100 is reasonably good but one cannot change lenses. A system camera is always better. If one have a GM1 with a standard micro 4/3 camera, he can make use of all the lenses, especially primes, that he has. It would be the ideal and logical choice as a backup body. One can even use it with the Lumix 100-300mm eventhough it may not be the best choice. With an adapter, one can easily shoot some photos with a Canon or Nikon super telephoto lens. Imagine having the ability to shoot with the Canon EF 600mm f/4.0L IS lens eventhough manual focus is required. With that combo, one can have a 1200mm capabilty enough for any bird photography.

One cannot do it with a RX100.

1 upvote
Total comments: 295
12