open letter to all the GF2 haterz

whats with all your complaints? i mean they announced a new camera called gf2. you thought it would be a replacement for your old gf1's that you started saving money to buy it. when t came out you didnt get what you expected. how about dont buy what you considered a crappy replacement and instead focus on the fact that you have saved money and now you can buy more lenses and adapters for your old gf1's or buy finepix x100 when it comes out. Stop all your complaining!
--
A New Hope

My hopes may have been ravage
and dreams turned to dust
but my soul will struggle
through this darkest night
and in this darkness,
my battered soul shall mend
to dream new dreams,
to hope without end.

I don't think anyone is saying there isn't a need for entry level cameras. What you're seeing is disappointment from people who expected an camera with the same naming scheme to the GF1 to be an upgrade to that camera. I was personally a little relieved - I spend too much money on camera gear and for once i don't really feel compelled to go out and buy the new model.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/inate

I think that's what confuses me most. Did anyone ever say it would be anything other than it turned out to be? It's not like Panasonic lied to anyone. Quite to the contrary, they did a remarkable job of keeping it under wraps.

If there were any expectations, all these people built it up in their own mind, and then, essentially, ended up disappointing themselves and going on a huge tirade against the product

Dan, after reading every single post in this heated thread, yours is the perhaps most sensible of them all.

I am of the opinion that the GF2 has its place, but it should have been given another model number. I say this as a GF1 owner and enthusiast. I like the smaller body of the GF2, but clearly a sacrifice has been made to get it that small, at the expense of prosumers like myself.

With regard to the GF1, it's hard to improve on what's already great. But I would like to shoot 1080p video with my GF1 (no, not 1080i). And I would die for in-camera JPEGs that actually resulted in true BLUE skies and shadows with a decent level of detail. More manual video controls (i.e., depth of field in video mode should be user-adjustable) and user-selectable language regardless of the market in which the camera was purchased, should be standard -- the lack of which forced me to use PTool to hack my GF1's firmware.

Unfortunately for those who have purchased the GF1 over the last few months, it would appear that Panasonic's newer firmware is not hackable. Some may contend that Panasonic has merely done this to prevent gray market selling of their cameras. But I feel it is a way of prodding GF1 enthusiasts to upgrade to the forthcoming GF2 rather than seek a better GF1 via firmware hacks.

Suffice it to say, I love the GF1 but I don't love Panasonic's marketing department.

But what I really, really would like are a better set of FAST micro 4/3 lenses. Sure I've got the F1.7 pancake, but what other micro 4/3 lenses out there are that fast? I want an F2 zoom lens, even if some contend that it is "too big for the GF1." I still want to have that option as a prosumer user. I see some superb FAST lenses coming out all the time, but not in the micro 4/3 format. Why? Clearly, the MBA-wielding marketing nuts are preventing it from happening. Quite sad indeed.

James

Dan Clark said:

Because people don't associate those names as an "Upgrade" to an existing camera. They are separate and new models and NOT upgrades. So who cares? However...

The GH2 is an upgrade to the GH1. The G2 is an upgrade to the G1. The GF2 is NOT an upgrade to the GF1.

After waiting for more than a year for the GH2, I'm very happy with what they've produced. OTOH, if they brought out a GH2 that was DOWN MARKETED, I would be even more PO'd.

Dan.

redrunnertc said:

So, why weren't people this upset when the G10 and EPL1 came out? That was a FAR more blatant exercise in "downmarketing" the brand than the GF2 is!

Also, who EXPECTED it to be an upgrade to the GF1?

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
JDW

Since when is an upgrade/update/refresh a RETROGRADE evolutionary step..???

This is a big miss-step by Panasonic IMHO. Was waiting to see what the GF2 was like before pulling trigger on NEX5... Sony wins hands down.

But hey, what do I know?

--
Sensorly yours...

http://photographernotaterrorist.org/
http://moveyourmoney.info/

As a marketing guy myself I can tell you panasonic has cleaverly released a product extension that wont elicit buyers remorse to current gf1 owners.

The gf1 is catered to enthusiasts who want a weekend camera but can never settle for a p&s, as wel as beginners who feel overwhelmed by DSLRs. What both have in common is the need to have full control over exposure, the ability to leverage natual light, and finally possibility to add peripherals if necessary. Think 80-20. 80% of the time you use 20% of the features on your camera. The gf1 has all the features as an slr at a cost... Size... Sensor size!

Back to the release of the gf2... Why such a lame release?

1. 1

Think Apple, dont we all love spending $4000 on a new imac that becomes obsolete every 2 years, or an iphone that gets outdated every year? Products that get updated too frequently is not a good thing. This is why brand marketers make clear distinctions between minor product revisions and product innovations. For example, auto company have an 8 year cycle for launching new cars. Each year is a minor facelift, and each new cycle is a body redesign.

1. 2

Micro four thirds is still fresh. Brand marketers need it to dissipate into the market place slowly. So far, the technology has been adopted by early adopters (semi pros for the most part... few beginners will pay $1200 for a starter kit when a canon XSI is $899 at bestbuy), and panasonic now wish for this technology to get into the hands of more users. So before making this technology more advanced, with more complex features, and limit its potential to semi pros, they have launched a soft product extension that keeps the buzz going without limiting their marketing reach.

Just my thoughts.

Pleaz excuuse the typoose, i'm writing this from my ipad.

Dave

Read just about every post here. All seem to agree with me. Panasonic screwed up. They gave us a dumbed-down version of a good camera. If yet another amateur camera is what you want, congratulations. I'll stick with other camera manufacturers who are capable enough to produce photographic instruments that help instead of stagnate my growth as a photographer.

Yes, there are other people out there with other needs. That is why companies have their "flagship" models and "amateur" models. How would you like it if Canon decided to dumb down your 5DII to a video capturing amateur device? You would be screaming "Fowl" like every other Canon fan boy. There is a place for everything. Panasonic should have improved the GF1, not dumb it down.

SF Photo Gal said:

There are all kinds of photographers out there with all kinds of needs. Why shouldn't Panny give those people an easy to use, small camera without a lot of clutter. They just gave us the GH-2. Most of the people in this forum are pretty hard core photo enthusiasts. Not everyone is interested in the same things we are.

SF Photo Gal
Canon 1DsIII & 5DII/Panasonic GH1-GF1-LX3

Click to expand...

The GF2 is not a successor to a GF1....

--
Raist3d (Photographer & Tools/Systems/Gui Games Developer)
Andreas Feininger (1906-1999) 'Photographers — idiots, of which there are
so many — say, “Oh, if only I had a Nikon or a Leica, I could make great
photographs.” That’s the dumbest thing I ever heard in my life. It’s
nothing but a matter of seeing, and thinking, and interest. That’s what
makes a good photograph.'

After all, changing the mode is a two press process on the screen. As a member of "generation Y" I am fully used to touchscreens and tbh the UI is what makes or breaks a touchscreen and I'd say that Panny has almost nailed it here. Even then, you could always use the d-pad to the right of the screen most likely when using the evf.

Your rant makes even less sense. Did you realize that of current cameras the only one that does not offer full automatic programs is the Leica M9? Do you seriously suggest that the Nikon D3x is a bad camera where the users just set the camera on auto and use it never to try out the other modes? Apparently that is what you say, since that camera have the same automatic options as the GF-2...

Raist3d said:

The GF2 is not a successor to a GF1....

Click to expand...

No, not to us. But the name is following that of the GF1, taking it one number up. And since the GF2 has been announced, the GF1 has been taken down from the global website.... So at least it seems to be presented as the successor.

If only they had kept the GF1 alive!!! By now I've accepted the idea that maybe a GP or what may be next and I'll carry on happily with my GF1 until that or something else shows up. But what if my GF1 breaks down? I don't like having to rely on the used market.

In the end the disappearance of the GF1 disappoints and annoys me way more than the appearance of the GF2.

frozenlight said:

This is a big miss-step by Panasonic IMHO. Was waiting to see what the GF2 was like before pulling trigger on NEX5... Sony wins hands down.

Click to expand...

Just a question here... What should Panasonic have done to make a camera that would make you choose it over the NEX?

I am just wondering.. because with the NEX you get even worse handling... worse balance (Same or smaller size compared with double up on lens size) and a horrible GUI (Apparently the GUI on the GF-2 should be good, but I have not seen one, so can't say)...

So, are you buying the NEX because you want even worse handling, balance and UI than wha tPanasonic can provide? Or is there another reason? Perhaps you are afraid of the bigger selection of lenses, where the NEX only have 3.. much easier to choose?

And on a last note... Many people have talked about that the GF-1 is just too big and they wanted an LX3 instead... Now Panasonic have made a µ4/3 in the same size, and the same people complain that it is now smaller than it used to be...

• Canon EOS-1D MKIV
• Olympus E5

I'd say the GF2 is in some pretty good company.....
--
Marty
http://www.fluidr.com/photos/marty4650/sets/72157606210120132
http://www.flickr.com/photos/marty4650/sets/72157606210120132/show/
my blog: http://marty4650.blogspot.com/
Olympus E-30
Olympus E-P1

Yes, but the user interface of Canons 1 series and the Olympus E-3/5 has been heavily criticized for these very reasons. However, the Canons and Olympus you mentioned certainly have mode dials, in form of buttons. The manufacturers choose this way of UI, because it is less likely that they become changed accidentally, a common requirement on professional camera bodies.

However, these examples do certainly not support the design decision of shifting important controls to touchscreen operation. The top models of every camera manufacturer will never dismiss the direct controls.

Marty4650 said:

• Canon EOS-1D MKIV
• Olympus E5

I'd say the GF2 is in some pretty good company.....
--
Marty
http://www.fluidr.com/photos/marty4650/sets/72157606210120132
http://www.flickr.com/photos/marty4650/sets/72157606210120132/show/
my blog: http://marty4650.blogspot.com/
Olympus E-30
Olympus E-P1

Click to expand...

--
Thomas

redrunnertc said:

Did you come out of the womb understanding the relationship between ISO, shutter speed, and aperture? And when to select shutter speed priority and when to select aperture priority? Oh, wait, you were born understanding exposure completely, so you never used those "beginner" modes - you went straight to full-on manual with your calibrated eyeball as a light meter.

People have to start somewhere with a "beginner" camera that helps them along and shows the benefit of further understanding the more manual modes.

Click to expand...

Before I owned digital I never owned a camera that had "beginner" modes, or not even P, A, or S modes. I've always own cameras that had full manual control; you had to dial in the shutter speed, aperture, and focus for EVERY shot.

While people do have to learn "somewhere" or "sometime", they do themselves a disservice having/relying on "beginner" modes (and I include P, A, & S modes in that).

I was lucky to have a mother who was an advanced photographer and taught me the basics of photography early in life...my first camera, an Agfa Isolette, was FULLY manual (you even had to **** the shutter for every shot), and you also have to use a handheld light meter and range finder to use the camera as there was no built-in light meter or distance finder.

So while I didn't come out of the womb knowing exposure control, I did know it before the age of 10!

All of my cameras up to the age of about 25 were fully manual. Then I got one with aperture priority (what a concept!). Some people decried that when it became available. I thought it was pretty cool! Didn't care for auto focus when it first came out, but that's because it didn't work well. They seem to have ironed that out! Same thing with touch screens - the first ones sucked, the new ones are pretty damn good!

My first several TV sets had a 13 channel dial and a volume control. Fully manual. And you had to walk across the room to change anything. Which was fine, because there wasn't much on. Those were the days!

I still like a lot of manual control of my cameras, but I'm not that picky about HOW I control the various functions. They either work intuitively or they don't. Rings and dials are OK. Touch screens are OK for some functions, like the mode dial, which I think the GF2 appears to get right IMHO. Dials and rings work really well for things like changing aperture or shutter speed on the fly - buttons I don't like for this because you have to always find the right button - the dial or ring you just turn one direction or the other. Yes, this is a dis of the epl1, which I happily owned for a few months, but not nearly as happily as the cameras with dial and ring controls that I've owned since.

And I still like having manual control of my TV set too, but being able to control the channel, the volume, the DVR, the fast forward, the pause, which recorded program to watch, etc, etc, etc, from my seat across the room is BETTER imho than the 13 channel switch and volume being the only controls and having to walk across the room to get to them.

We have some weird selective biases and preconceptions. When did old fashioned cameras become sacred?

-Ray

Mike_PEAT said:

Before I owned digital I never owned a camera that had "beginner" modes, or not even P, A, or S modes. I've always own cameras that had full manual control; you had to dial in the shutter speed, aperture, and focus for EVERY shot.

While people do have to learn "somewhere" or "sometime", they do themselves a disservice having/relying on "beginner" modes (and I include P, A, & S modes in that).

I was lucky to have a mother who was an advanced photographer and taught me the basics of photography early in life...my first camera, an Agfa Isolette, was FULLY manual (you even had to **** the shutter for every shot), and you also have to use a handheld light meter and range finder to use the camera as there was no built-in light meter or distance finder.

So while I didn't come out of the womb knowing exposure control, I did know it before the age of 10!

Click to expand...

First, not everyone is lucky enough to have an advanced photographer mother to teach them all that, but more importantly - how often did you lug around all that equipment so you could get properly exposed and focused pictures? What was the keeper ratio?

I would say the whole point of m43 is to support the idea of "the best camera is the one you have with you" by offering big camera image quality in something more portable, and in that regard, the GF2 is where it's at for 99% of the people out there.

As mentioned above, it funny how nostalgic the photographic community is, really actively resisting every advance - autofocus, autoexposure, film vs digital. In EVERY instance they have made it easier to get a better quality photograph, allowing the photographer to pay more attention to the art instead of the mechanics.

MadsR said:

frozenlight said:

This is a big miss-step by Panasonic IMHO. Was waiting to see what the GF2 was like before pulling trigger on NEX5... Sony wins hands down.

Click to expand...

Just a question here... What should Panasonic have done to make a camera that would make you choose it over the NEX?

Click to expand...

A larger sensor for one thing. Better low light capability for another. Better grip. When would you like me to stop?

MadsR said:

I am just wondering.. because with the NEX you get even worse handling... worse balance (Same or smaller size compared with double up on lens size) and a horrible GUI (Apparently the GUI on the GF-2 should be good, but I have not seen one, so can't say)...

Click to expand...

I have shot with the GF1 and NEX5 in Japan. Here is the news... the NEX5 handles much better than the GF1 and feels better in the hand. The NEX5 GUI is actually not bad in comparison.

MadsR said:

So, are you buying the NEX because you want even worse handling, balance and UI than wha tPanasonic can provide? Or is there another reason? Perhaps you are afraid of the bigger selection of lenses, where the NEX only have 3.. much easier to choose?

Click to expand...

No, I'm buying NEX5 because it has better handling and balance, a pretty good UI, and I can use all my Leica and Nikkor glass with it via adapter (as can GF1).

MadsR said:

And on a last note... Many people have talked about that the GF-1 is just too big and they wanted an LX3 instead... Now Panasonic have made a µ4/3 in the same size, and the same people complain that it is now smaller than it used to be...

Click to expand...

Not me.

--
Sensorly yours...

http://photographernotaterrorist.org/
http://moveyourmoney.info/

I'll be happy to know you have bought NEX5. Hope to see your posts on NEX forum and photos you have taken in your gallery
--
DSC-R1, DMC-G1(14-45)