Reading mode: Light Dark

NEWS: E-P1 & G1/GH1 are the same size!

Go to last post
In the scheme of things, the size difference does not matter since you can't pocket either camera. Both end up strapped around your neck/shoulder and the weight difference between the two is inconsequential. However, if you did carry the Olympus with the 17mm, you could remove it and pocket both, provided you also carried the lens and body caps.
 
with parallel structure. Here's your corrected sentence:

If you think your camera is prettier you think you take better photographs.
 
The comparison photo of the G1 and E-P1 gives a false impression of size, you cannot take a photo with the E-P1 as it is shown, the lens is locked and retracted, unlocked and ready to shoot, it would add about 35mm to the lenghth. Just a thought!
 
Jay Miller said:
In the scheme of things, the size difference does not matter since you can't pocket either camera.
Click to expand...
Jay,

You keep saying this, but it just isn't true. The Ep-1+17mm fits very nicely in my coat pocket. Ep-1+14-42 fits (kind of) in my cargo pants pocket. Well, it fits, but it bounces around and is a bit heavy for pants.

Come jacket season, I plan to carry the Ep-1+17mm all the time. I don't think I could do that with the G-1.

Michael

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/michaelthek/
 
George in Norfolk said:
The comparison photo of the G1 and E-P1 gives a false impression of size, you cannot take a photo with the E-P1 as it is shown, the lens is locked and retracted, unlocked and ready to shoot, it would add about 35mm to the lenghth. Just a thought!
Click to expand...
George,

That's true, but for two points:

1) Try comparing the EP-1+17mm to the G1+17mm. Ready to shoot and a pretty big size difference.

2) The size is difference is far more important for the carrying around time then the shooting time. When it is folded up and stuck in a bag/large coat pocket, it is a pretty substantial difference. For shooting, the size difference is trivial.

For me, the size difference is the difference between something I will carry all the time, and something I will not.

Some people have said the they like the Ep-1 because it doesn't look like a DSLR and it is less obtrusive. I have never held a G-1, so I can't comment on that.

Michael

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/michaelthek/
 
Michael Kaufman said:
2) The size is difference is far more important for the carrying around time then the shooting time. When it is folded up and stuck in a bag/large coat pocket, it is a pretty substantial difference. For shooting, the size difference is trivial.
Click to expand...
True, and nobody goes around saying the LX3 is huge because when its lens is extended and ready to shoot, it's nearly the same depth as the E-P1.
 
I have (and love) both. The E-P1 with the 17mm lens fits (easily) in a jacket pocket, the GH1 (with same lens) does not. It has to do with the shape, thickness, protrusions, etc. but it is what it is.
 
It continues to astound me to hear many say the G1/GH1 and E-P1 are similar, comparable, not that different, (you pick the words).

As a E-P1 owner, and onethat has held the Panny.....it makes me just wonder that perhaps:
  • we are hearing from those that have never held both
  • that work for one or the other company,
  • that go by mathematical measurements
For me, it is not the incremental difference nominally in size, weight, or shape in a quantitative way, but...

the resultant difference in the form factor, the way one holds the camera, carries it.

The Panny is a small dSLR, the Oly is a large compact, in my opinion.

The Panny I would hold over a shoulder, it competes more with a dSLR.

The Oly, for me, is the first neckstrap camera.

Compacts I hold via wrist strap.

dSLRs, I hold via shoulder strap.
--
'Photos are what remain when the memories are forgotten' - Angular Mo.
 
Derek Bach said:
You will find I say a similar thing - they are the same size if you want the features offered by the G1/GH1 and you mount the same lens on each.

Quote:
This is only true (same size) however, if you disregard...
Click to expand...
What type of logic is this ?
A is the same as B, if you disregard...everything that makes them different?

--
'Photos are what remain when the memories are forgotten' - Angular Mo.
 
JoeVC said:
This "Panny vs Oly garbage" is because you have the mixing of two previously seperate discussion forum cultures. It's like a marriage, where two families have to learn to live with "the other side."

The thing about the G1 size that I find interesting is that, on paper, the G1's body appears to be much deeper (front to back) than the E-P1, due to the front-to-back depth of the hand grip. This is fine for people who don't own a G1, or who can't visualize in three dimensions and instead merely read statistics without really understanding.

But for us who actually own a G1, we find that the lens mount is BEHIND the hand grip; recessed, if you will. If you can picture taking a hacksaw to a G1 body (Oly fans, here's your chance to fantasize) and removing the handgrip entirely, leaving just the flat body itself, then the front of the flat body is where the lens mounts to. So, with a lens attached to the G1, the overall front-to-back size of the body + lens is minus the handgrip's depth entirely. Hence, the G1 and E-P1 overall size are much closer than they are different, in "real life"
Click to expand...
IMO, this, is literally "non"-sense.... and, I live in the New York City area.

The handgrip creates volume, the body has thickness.

It is not a matter of measurements at the extremeities of each dimension, but how that volume is filled.

What does it mean, they are more similar than different? compared to what?

I have held the G1/GH1

("real life" meaning carrying the body in a bag, or on a strap, with a lens already attached. Why would you carry around either camera sans lens, when the sensor is exposed to dust, I don't understand.)
JoeVC said:
JoeVC said:
Joe
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
'Photos are what remain when the memories are forgotten' - Angular Mo.
 
That's what I tried to say when I misguidedly started this thread:

Quote:

This is only true (being same size) if you disregard the extra space taken taken up by the excellent "viewfinder", built in flash and higher resolution articulated screen of the G1 and mount the same lens on each camera.
End Quote

So I agree with you even if you did not understand what I wrote so many hours ago. Thanks for the clarification shots and I also agree we should put the discussion to rest.

Thanks for all the contributions I've enjoyed reading them all - such passion about what I meant to be a light hearted debate about two excellent cameras !
Derek
 
BigMike1 said:
Derek Bach said:
If you what an camera the same size as an E-P1 but with an excellent viewfinder, a built in flash and a higher resolution articulated screen you can have one today its called a G1 or GH1.
Click to expand...
Anyone who says anything critical about any Olympus product is a troll.

--
Big Mike
http://www.bigmikephotoblog.com
Click to expand...
Hi Mike

That is proper sarcasm so maybe I got it wrong and you do understand sarcasm, or at least know how to use it.
 
Derek Bach said:
That's what I tried to say when I misguidedly started this thread:

Quote:

This is only true (being same size) if you disregard the extra space taken taken up by the excellent "viewfinder", built in flash and higher resolution articulated screen of the G1 and mount the same lens on each camera.
End Quote

So I agree with you even if you did not understand what I wrote so many hours ago. Thanks for the clarification shots and I also agree we should put the discussion to rest.
Click to expand...
The problem is that I did understand. I understood, but you were wrong.

Look at the picture again. Even without the extra space taken taken up by the excellent "viewfinder", built in flash and higher resolution articulated screen of the G1 is is still a lot thicker in the body.

Now if you had said that if you discount the extra space taken taken up by the excellent "viewfinder", built in flash and higher resolution articulated screen of the G1 and remove about a third of the depth of the body then no one would have argued with you.

Michael

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/michaelthek/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top