"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.

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?

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??

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.

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.

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.

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

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

{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.

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.

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!

The best perfumes come in small bottles...

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 ?

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

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.

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.

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

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.

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...

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

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

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.

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.

the small size is great, and quite obvious.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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

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...

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.

The grip design is simply brilliant!

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.

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.

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

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.

MFT fixed lens please.

This article, Barneys, Shawns on the A7...
I just love them! Saying so much more than a test image where everyone and their brother tries to find arguments for their pet peve.
Thanks!

To lift it a notch or two, add a second opinion to for instance the a7 write up, preferably from someone with a totally different view.
And allow it to be views and opinions!

I may only be a hobbyist and certainly not a dedicated pixel peeper but i can recognize very good images when i see them and the DMC-GM1 produces very good images, especial high iso images. Does it have every feature and perfect size? No! But it can sure take very good pictures in the right hand. There is not and probably will not be "the perfect camera" that has every feature and performance that if not every person or at least 99% of people want. It aint a perfect world.

I don't know how they pick gear of the year, but it is obvious that image quality is not an important criterion.

Thanks Allison. I have no basis yet upon which to agree or disagree, but I am VERY enamoured of the camera's size and reported build.

Marc