I'm doubting the G1 will be a success ...

If you compare DSLR sales to lens sales, it averages out to about two lenses per DSLR. Which makes all of the whining about lens changes and heavy camera bags sound pretty silly to me.

Back to the point of the thread....

Panny has made it clear that they are targeting people looking to upgrade from P&Ss. If the G1 is going to be successful, then Panny has to get more shelf space in the so-called Big Box stores. The more people that see them, the more people will buy them. Without significantly more shelf space than the FZs cameras got, the G1 is certainly doomed to failure.

Note that getting shelf space won't guarantee success because the G1 has to compete for P&S upgraders against every low-end DSLR on the market. The differences in the G1 may appeal to some people, but I don't think that it will make siginificant in-roads against DSLRs. But then again I can't stand Will Farrell, Ben Stiller, Pauley Shore, or Adam Sandler, so their "success" shows that not everyone likes the same thing.

BIJ001 said:

GregGory said:

It's beyond my mind why people consider lens interchangeability as a
con.

Click to expand...

Because of the dreaded dust on the sensor.

Click to expand...

And some people believe in horoscopes. They come true about as often as dust on the sensor is a problem.....and both are as easily dismissed.

Pixelizer said:

From what I've seen in person and in multiple discussion forums, the
bulk of DSLR users are chuckling at the G1. They tend to view it as a
"bridge DSLR", if you will ... neither fish nor fowl. In that regard,
they see it as not much more than a glorified FZ with a couple of
interchangeable lenses.

Click to expand...

Of course they're going to laugh at it. They have a few grand tied up in lenses for larger, heavier cameras that make noise when you shoot photos, and which 99% of the time really won't have any advantage in the output. They have to laugh because they can't begin to allow that something else might be worthwhile.

The G1 is the first camera I'd consider upgrading to, from my FZ50. I can wait a little while for them to get some of the first teething pains resolved, and for the prices to come down. Maybe, just maybe, a digital camera that isn't tied to a mechanical viewfinder from half a century ago, could be a step forward...?

Barry Fitzgerald said:

Nothing wrong with the idea or concept, but at it's release price,
it's not likely to be a hot seller.

I vote for APS/4/3 compacts, and none of this silly lens change
stuff, I have SLR's, I don't need another lens system.

I think Panasonic have missed the point, and cough,...the price!

Click to expand...

Oh come on, how many cameras stay at their release price for very long? The FZ50 costs way less than the FZ30 did and IMO is at least its equal in every way. Besides, the rules of business involve selling as many of an item as you can at the highest price point, then lowering the price to sell more, then lowering again to sell more, to keep the sales volume steady. Any new camera is going to start out at the highest price, and some people WILL buy.

aaronbeach said:

m4/3 might offer something truly
unique

Click to expand...

Well report back to us when it does.

"Potential" means absolutely nothing in the context of buying a camera. In the here and now:

• The differences between the G1 and low-end DSLRs don't give much advantage (if any) to the G1.
• I certainly don't see anything in the G1 to warrant the premium price that Panny is asking.

Those two things are more than enough to support the premise of the OP....though I don't know why we are going through it again.

I think if you're talking to users of pro, full frame cameras their desires are not for a G1. We agree on that. But I just don't think that means the G1 will fail, because I think it is correctly aimed at a different target. That was the point I really wanted to make.

Steve82 said:

• The differences between the G1 and low-end DSLRs don't give much

advantage (if any) to the G1.

• I certainly don't see anything in the G1 to warrant the premium

price that Panny is asking.

Click to expand...

Think about it like this then - come early next year, the direct competitior in 4/3 for the G1 is going to be the E-A1. Same upgrades on the basic 420/520 as the G1 has. And I'd guess Olympus is planning on selling them for a touch more than the 420/520.

Oh, and the G1 does it in a package about the size of the 420.

DriftForge said:

Steve82 said:

• The differences between the G1 and low-end DSLRs don't give much

advantage (if any) to the G1.

• I certainly don't see anything in the G1 to warrant the premium

price that Panny is asking.

Click to expand...

Think about it like this then - come early next year, the direct
competitior in 4/3 for the G1 is going to be the E-A1. Same upgrades
on the basic 420/520 as the G1 has. And I'd guess Olympus is
planning on selling them for a touch more than the 420/520.

Oh, and the G1 does it in a package about the size of the 420.

Click to expand...

You beat me to it, I'm actually interested in both of these cameras, The E-A1 along with my current 4/3 lenses would be the "big" kit, what I'm really going out somewhere, or doing studio work.

But the G1 kit lens pancake and 7-14, if the price is right is just such a perfect package, it has all the features, image quality looks good enough, and I could buy a tiny bag to carry it all

Why?
Because the IQ of high MP 1/1.7" and 1/2.5" are just disappointing.

m4/3 opens up the battle ground of DX size sensors being used in compact cameras, like DP1.

--
Current gears
-------------------
Nikon: D50, 50 f1.8, 85 f1.8, 180 f2.8, 16-85 VR
Canon: Rebel XT, 50 f1.4, 18-55 IS, 420EX
Canon: S5 IS
Fuji: F31fd

Previous Gears
--------------------
Canon: 60 f2.8 macro, 24-105 L, 17-85 IS, 85 f1.8, 17-40 L, 17-55 IS f2.8, 18-55
Canon: Pro90, S1, A710, A650
Nikon: 18-200 VR, 18-55, 55-200 VR, 70-300 VR, SB-800
Sigma: 18-50 f2.8
Tamron: 17-50 f2.8, 28-75

Steve82 said:

If you compare DSLR sales to lens sales, it averages out to about two
lenses per DSLR.

Click to expand...

Thanks Steve, I said the same thing here recently . . .

Steve82 said:

Which makes all of the whining about lens changes
and heavy camera bags sound pretty silly to me.

Click to expand...

I don't think so, and it's a bit hard calling it "whining" . . . you're missing the point that with 2 lenses one has a 50% chance of having the right lens on for a given unexpected opportunity. I like SLR's in spite of this, not because of this.

The rest - I agree with.

Mike
--
FZ8, F20

Too many amateurs and professionals are using film. New camera bodies and a whole new system that requires a computer...it will never catch on.
Oh...wait...
nevermind...

Ask what you can do with the camera.

Take the silent shutter. I still have my old Olympus E20. It uses a leaf shutter, and has no moving mirror, so the shutter is silent. It comes in handy for events like church services where the clack-twang of the larger dslrs would be considered intrusive. I can see wedding vows as a place where the pro might want to whip out a G1 so as not to detract from what's going on.

The G1 will go like anything that's new and different. The conservative, defend-my-judgment types will pooh-pooh it as not being the same as their traditional dslr. A few open minded types will try it and find uses for it's new features. If you contrast the best dslr's of today with the film cameras of twenty years ago, there isn't a great deal of difference, except for the digital sensor. Time to push the envelope and reinvent photographic technique.

Remember live view on a dslr when it first came out - a solution looking for a problem, and the old school types gave it the upturned nose. Until a few bright minds found out what one could do with 10x live view and macro photography, completely eliminate focus error (which was a big problem with very close macro). Who knows what benefits will be found in the several new features the G1 offers? It's already proven a boon for the naysaying industry.

Pixelizer said:

1. Changing lenses can cause you to miss a shot entirely. Sure, you
might be able to get a decent crop out of a wide shot, but you're
wasting perfectly good pixels when you do that.

Click to expand...

Having a fixed lens can cause you to miss shots, too. The Leica 25 1.4 has made possible shots that couldn't possibly be taken with a fixed lens. Same goes for the magnificent 7-14, or the razor sharp 50-200, or the 50 Macro.

Pixelizer said:

2. Having to carry extra lenses around is a PITA, especially once you
get spoiled to a great, flexible tool like the FZ50. I carried extra
lenses around during my 35mm days, and I've had all that I want.

Click to expand...

Depends on how good a shot you want. If you want snapshots, extra lenses are a pain. If you want magnificent photographs, it's not a pain.

Pixelizer said:

3. Removable lenses mean dust on the sensor. Never mind the sensor
shakers and the air puffers and all that ... you are almost bound to
get some dust in there ... especially with an open-shutter,
exposed-sensor design like on the G1.

Click to expand...

Hmmm... I've owned 4/3 cameras for four years now, done a lot of lens changes. Never seen so much as a speck of dust.

Pixelizer said:

4. Having to have more than one lens is inherently more expensive
than having one all-purpose lens. And since long zoom is vital to me,
the 45-200mm for the G1 would be a necessity, but it leaves me too
wide when I want to shoot a closer subject, or inside a home or
building. So I would be switching between it and the 14-45 or
whatever. That means my camera bag is that much heavier and more
cluttered and God forbid I drop one of them while changing.

Click to expand...

Again, depends on how good a shot one wants. For snapshots, correct. For going further, not correct. Most long zooms suck on IQ when compared to shorter focal length zooms or even (gasp gag) primes.

So from the perspective of taking snapshots with a P&S, yes the G1 probably doesn't improve much. For the P&S shooter who's looking at the beautiful, creative shots from a dslr and wants to see those results, it's a next logical step.

Mikedigi said:

Steve82 said:

Which makes all of the whining about lens changes
and heavy camera bags sound pretty silly to me.

Click to expand...

I don't think so, and it's a bit hard calling it "whining" . . .
you're missing the point that with 2 lenses one has a 50% chance of
having the right lens on for a given unexpected opportunity. I like
SLR's in spite of this, not because of this.

The rest - I agree with.

Click to expand...

My long response got lost over an internet hiccup...which is probably for the best. I'll replace that lost reponse with two thoughts:

Which causes more missed shots....changing lenses on a DSLR or the poor ISO performance of the FZs? How you answer that question will go a long way to defining the two sides of the same argument that comes up over and over again around here.

One definition of whining is "To complain or protest in a childish fashion". Right now, there are two types of posts that I put in that category:

• Endless complaining about wanting something that doesn't exist to people who don't make anything. (ie most FZ-60 posts)
• Endless complaining about the "disadvantages" of something that has been used successfully for decades (ie most "evils of DSLR" posts)

Midwest said:

Oh come on, how many cameras stay at their release price for very
long? The FZ50 costs way less than the FZ30 did and IMO is at least
its equal in every way. Besides, the rules of business involve
selling as many of an item as you can at the highest price point,
then lowering the price to sell more, then lowering again to sell
more, to keep the sales volume steady. Any new camera is going to
start out at the highest price, and some people WILL buy.

Click to expand...

You are right prices fall. But panasonic have a history of releases at high prices, only to dump them in the bargain bin later on, L1, L10..both sales disasters...

I did not expect them to price this new beast at budget DSLR levels, hell some compacts are more expensive than that! (think of that what you may)

But I thought a more realistic price is something nearer to £400 odd. That's about £200 less.

2nd point, is with an HD video one on the horizon, it's not logical to even look at this model, so it's instantly obsolete before it's even available for sale.

I don't mock the concept, it's very interesting indeed, and it looks pretty good. But they won't sell that many at this price. Dumping the price down, will help, but how long will that take??? And the impact has been lost..

Steve82 said:

And some people believe in horoscopes. They come true about as
often as dust on the sensor is a problem.....and both are as easily
dismissed.

Click to expand...

Like it or not, it can be a problem. I have not had many issues myself, maybe my AS unit blasts some off. But then my sensor is behind a shutter and mirror.

This one is right smack up to the front of the camera, dust buster or not..pollen and sticky dust will not shift..not to mention the chance of smearing the thing..or a blast of rain...oops wet sensor.

They could have at least had something to protect it, when changing the lens.

Puh-leeze. You must not realize how condescending it sounds for you to characterize all FZ50 users as "snapshot" shooters just because we have fixed-lens cameras. Your DSLR snobbery is showing a little here.

I have done shootouts with a number of my friends who use Canon and Nikon DSLR's and they are invariably impressed (and often outshot) with my FZ50. Sure, they get the advantage when we go beyond ISO 200, but I don't shoot low-light stuff except in emergencies.

Remember how many professional photographers have uttered those famous words ... "It isn't the camera as much as it is the photographer that determines the quality of a photograph." Ansel Adams or Steven Meisel could outshoot both of us with a Brownie box camera.

Go to the Comparometer at imaging-resource.com and compare the FZ50 ISO 100 studio shot side-by-side at full size with any DSLR, and I think you'll be impressed, too!

TrapperJohn said:

Pixelizer said:

1. Changing lenses can cause you to miss a shot entirely. Sure, you
might be able to get a decent crop out of a wide shot, but you're
wasting perfectly good pixels when you do that.

Click to expand...

Having a fixed lens can cause you to miss shots, too. The Leica 25
1.4 has made possible shots that couldn't possibly be taken with a
fixed lens. Same goes for the magnificent 7-14, or the razor sharp
50-200, or the 50 Macro.

TrapperJohn said:

2. Having to carry extra lenses around is a PITA, especially once you
get spoiled to a great, flexible tool like the FZ50. I carried extra
lenses around during my 35mm days, and I've had all that I want.

Click to expand...

Depends on how good a shot you want. If you want snapshots, extra
lenses are a pain. If you want magnificent photographs, it's not a
pain.

TrapperJohn said:

3. Removable lenses mean dust on the sensor. Never mind the sensor
shakers and the air puffers and all that ... you are almost bound to
get some dust in there ... especially with an open-shutter,
exposed-sensor design like on the G1.

Click to expand...

Hmmm... I've owned 4/3 cameras for four years now, done a lot of lens
changes. Never seen so much as a speck of dust.

TrapperJohn said:

4. Having to have more than one lens is inherently more expensive
than having one all-purpose lens. And since long zoom is vital to me,
the 45-200mm for the G1 would be a necessity, but it leaves me too
wide when I want to shoot a closer subject, or inside a home or
building. So I would be switching between it and the 14-45 or
whatever. That means my camera bag is that much heavier and more
cluttered and God forbid I drop one of them while changing.

Click to expand...

Again, depends on how good a shot one wants. For snapshots, correct.
For going further, not correct. Most long zooms suck on IQ when
compared to shorter focal length zooms or even (gasp gag) primes.

So from the perspective of taking snapshots with a P&S, yes the G1
probably doesn't improve much. For the P&S shooter who's looking at
the beautiful, creative shots from a dslr and wants to see those
results, it's a next logical step.

Click to expand...

--
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large numbers.

Entropius said:

Entropius said:

About three years from now,
I reckon the descendants of the G1 will be very tempting indeed,
and not just to the current target of female consumers.

Panasonic may be onto something there. In Japan women are
extremely conscious of weight and size.

Click to expand...

That's the same story with the FZ1. They wanted to sell a long-zoom
camera to women, and made this tiny thing that was basically all lens.

Then they realized that hobbyist male photographers were buying it
too because of its manual controls, realized that they were sitting
on something good, and spun off the FZ10 line for the more serious
types who didn't mind the bulk while still improving the FZ1.

Click to expand...

Your observation is spot on, but you might be interested to hear
that the FZ1 didn't have manual controls originally (because of the
user they aimed it at) but when enthusiasts started buying it and asked
for PASM, they brought out the FZ2 with these controls and also a
FW update to the FZ1 that gave it PASM via menu. (I think they tried
to charge for the FW originally, but internet is internet... .

Entropius said:

... and now the FZ line's been one of the most successful superzoom
product lines in the market: the FZ50 is still the benchmark bridge
camera.

Probably the same thing will happen with the G1.

Click to expand...

Quite possible. Will be interesting to follow.

Just my two oere
Erik from Sweden

Let me throw this page at you from my web site. I, or rather Mary Lu, did all those shots with the Canon 5D a full frame digital. Most, if not all of them, could not have been taken with a small lens - small sensor camera, because the tight depth of field just isn't possible at any distance much past a foot or two. I think you'll agree that that page depends on the visual isolation the shallow depth of field a camera like the 5D with a bit longer lens is capable of providing. Here is the link:

http://www.performanceflyrods.com/autumn08/autumnmtns.html
--
Dave Lewis

Barry Fitzgerald said:

BIJ001 said:

Because of the dreaded dust on the sensor.

Click to expand...

And a nice windy day, no shutter to protect the sensor. Sure the
dustbuster is good, but get some pollen on there, and you are in
trouble.

Click to expand...

We'll see. The Oly SSWF has been pretty darn good and the G1 one is
supposed to be improved: higher frequency and two different ones instead
of one. Cleaning should be simpler than a DSLR since the sensor is not as
recessed, the shutter is open by default (no risk of damaging it in case of
power failure as with DSLRs) and no mirror to damage either.

The mirror of a DSLR itself causes debris and lubricants to wear off and
possibly end up on the sensor. And it causes the air in the mirror chamber to
blow the dust around, increasing the chance of it ending up on the sensor.

Member said:

Never mind a brief shower...

That sensor sits really close to the front of the camera, IMO it
should not be exposed like that.

Click to expand...

A DSLR mirror is also close to the front. And it is, I think, even more
delicate, with it's semitransparent coating, than the sensor (or rather
the SSWF).

And you have the focus screen there too, always prone to attract dust.

Just my two oere
Erik from Sweden