Reading mode: Light Dark

GH1 rated bottom in Sunday Times Ingear magazine

Go to last post
F

frncz

Member
Messages
29
Reaction score
0
Location
London, UK
In their 1st November edition, the Sunday Times had a comparison of SLR cameras able to record video, including GH1, Nikon, Canon, Olympus and Pentax. GH1 had best video capability, but came out bottom of the ranking (2/5) because of cost, the lack of a optical viewfinder, poor image quality and small grip. Nikon came tops, with Canon a close second, both of these costing half the GH1.
 
That sounds about right, you really didn't expect the GH-1 to beat a bundle of true DSLR's did you? It has its own market(Video/decent IQ), though at the current cost, I don't even see it being worth it.

--
  • David
 
frncz said:
In their 1st November edition, the Sunday Times had a comparison of SLR cameras able to record video, including GH1, Nikon, Canon, Olympus and Pentax. GH1 had best video capability, but came out bottom of the ranking (2/5) because of cost, the lack of a optical viewfinder, poor image quality and small grip. Nikon came tops, with Canon a close second, both of these costing half the GH1.
Click to expand...
It isn't a SLR.
--
Oll an gwella,
Jim

 
LordGriNz said:
That sounds about right, you really didn't expect the GH-1 to beat a bundle of true DSLR's did you? It has its own market(Video/decent IQ), though at the current cost, I don't even see it being worth it.
Click to expand...
For those actually doing serious video, only the 7D is considered as being competitive with the GH1.

The EVF and lack of a mirror is actually a great advantage for video. I doubt that there is a professional video camera made that uses an optical view finder.
 
frncz said:
In their 1st November edition, the Sunday Times had a comparison of SLR cameras able to record video, including GH1, Nikon, Canon, Olympus and Pentax. GH1 had best video capability, but came out bottom of the ranking (2/5) because of cost, the lack of a optical viewfinder, poor image quality and small grip. Nikon came tops, with Canon a close second, both of these costing half the GH1.
Click to expand...
Ahhhh yes. That optical viewfinder is oh so important for shooting video.

Which Nikon or Canon video-enabled DSLRs can you get with a 28-280 equivalent for half the price of the GH1 ?

Sadly an article like that probably has as much influence as dpreview.
  • Dennis
--
Gallery at http://kingofthebeasts.smugmug.com
 
Which camera competes with the GH1, none! which is why demand outstrips supply.
 
rivoth said:
LordGriNz said:
That sounds about right, you really didn't expect the GH-1 to beat a bundle of true DSLR's did you? It has its own market(Video/decent IQ), though at the current cost, I don't even see it being worth it.
Click to expand...
For those actually doing serious video, only the 7D is considered as being competitive with the GH1.

The EVF and lack of a mirror is actually a great advantage for video. I doubt that there is a professional video camera made that uses an optical view finder.
Click to expand...
Precisely, the 'review' was just total nonsense and had nothing to do with video at all - the Nikon has serious video limitations whereas the GH1 excels in this area yet they marked the GH1 the lowest and criticised features which work better for video (EVF) Even the E-P1 rated higher than the GH1 despite its far more basic video support and lack of a viewfinder entirely.

John
 
Hey, I remember about a year ago the Sunday Times compared several DSLRs, and included the Canon G10 in their mix, which for some reason rated at the bottom.

What does that tell you about their reviews?

Michael
 
Interesting review. Did they compare the quality and costs of lenses when doing the quality and cost comparison assessment? Did they think to compare the GH1 EVF and Swing Out Screen to the high end or mid range Dedicated Video Cams, or the Lack! of this feature in an 'optical' viewfinder DSLR, which generally do not have a visible rear screen unless it is right in front of you. Or the Weight of a GH1, External Stereo microphone held high to video a scene.... compared to a DSLR and equivalent super zoom lens? I know which I would rather have over my head or at arms length for any length of time...

Once cannot compare apples and oranges, all in all a silly review IMHO

Phil
--
http://matix.zenfolio.com
 
tameside said:
Which camera competes with the GH1, none! which is why demand outstrips supply.
Click to expand...
Or, maybe Panny doesn't produce enough to meet demand.
 
frncz said:
In their 1st November edition, the Sunday Times had a comparison of SLR cameras able to record video, including GH1, Nikon, Canon, Olympus and Pentax. GH1 had best video capability, but came out bottom of the ranking (2/5) because of cost, the lack of a optical viewfinder, poor image quality and small grip. Nikon came tops, with Canon a close second, both of these costing half the GH1.
Click to expand...
Hm. How did it do in the compact comparison?

Or maybe the m43 comparison?

Poor m43... Doesn't know who to compare to!

-- LC3
 
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