I have the GX1. I'll gladly sell it when I get my hands on the G1 X.
I also have the GX1/PZ - a fantastic (and equally portable) camera. Not sure why you would view it as such, considering it is actually marginally smaller and lighter than the GX 1. And after all, there's no requirement to carry additional lenses
To me the toughest competition for the GX 1 is the Panasonic G3. I can buy the G3 with kit lens for $599. I could sell the kit lens unused for $100 reducing my price to $499. Then I could buy the 14-42mm X lens for $400. The G3 with the X lens is smaller than the GX 1 in terms of weight. The G3 includes an articulated LCD, an eye level view finder, and a built in flash like the GX 1 The G3 might focus faster then the GX 1. The total cost would be only $100 more for the Panny package, which I consider fairly insignificant. The problem is that I would end up with less focal range and a slower lens. Still, this is the closest competitor I have seen from a feature, size, and cost basis. I am seriously considering the G3, but I am afraid I might not be able to resist the temptation to buy more lenses and accessories, getting me into a third system camera.I also have the GX1/PZ - a fantastic (and equally portable) camera. Not sure why you would view it as such, considering it is actually marginally smaller and lighter than the GX 1. And after all, there's no requirement to carry additional lenses
The thing that tipped it for me between GX1 and G1 X, all else being reasonably comparable, was the focus speed. The two reviews I've seen of the Canon both indicate "average" p&s focus speed (.5 seconds in good light). The Panny is fast - almost like a DSLR - in that respect. Don't get me wrong, I don't think one could go wrong with either - the Panny is just the better tool for my needs.
Interesting. I shoot mostly lanscape and expect G1 X to be much better than LX5 in this regard because of larger pixel size. But DxOMark's dynamic range score shows that LX5 (11.1 EVs) scores higher than G1 X (10.8 EVs). What gives?
In other words they are practically equally slow or fast across majority of range.
Once again, point to me m43 zooms in overlapping range that are slower , period, if you can. You can't. On the other hand I am pointing out to you that you are stuck with slow zoom on G1X and can't do anything about it, I can change the lens when I want faster.
Do YOU understand the meaning of what I just said, that even if you stick the legacy lens on NEX5 it will still be smaller than G1X? Take NEX5 in your hand (I had one, did you ever have it?), take say adapter for Canon FD and one of great primes, and you will get better performance, better DOF, both in smaller package.
It won't. Samples clearly show that.
At least now we know where tunnel perspective is coming from.
People that want a compact want a compact package. They are willing to compromise on few things, like DOF and speed, to get that compactness. But here you don't get that compactness and you still are stuck with slow zoom and big DOF. That's not a compromise. That's a lose-lose.
... but you do want G1X that is bigger and heavier?
)"...a do-everything simple camera."Zoran -- Sorry you can't see it. Gary has made a very clear case and it is ultimately . I can easily switch to my full frame DSLR and a fast lens and beat the pants off all the smaller cameras. So, ultimately, it's all relative.
Does the buyer want to invest in a full system, or just buy a do-everything simple camera? (There's no right answer!
Except it isn't, unless I only carry one lens from the M43 system. I either carry my prime for speed faster than f3.5, or a zoom for reach.
Gunzorro, I am sorry you can't see it either, but when you buy $800 "compact" you are buying into whole new system. One that is very inflexible. Also, if you really can't open your mind what is stopping you from treating EP3 with kit lens as "compact", one that gives you flexibility, even if it is "only" to be able to clean dust from it's sensor which you are not able to do with G1X?
Speaking of bad arguments, I know people can always come up with some ridiculous examples to suit their fanboi rah rah rah but you really should be thinking before posting. Your "point" is so ridiculous that I don't even want to waste my time explaining why, it should be obvious to everyone with little common sense and knowledge. I will just bring to your attention that EP3 with Oly's 45/1.8 is much smaller and lighter than G1X while subject isolation is much better.There's no way a M43 with a Nikon 85mm AIS lens (or 50/1.4, 35/2, etc) will be as small as a G1X! Ha-ha! You've got a bad argument there for anyone who's ever owned real legacy lenses.
Dust will get into that body, just like it did for number of G owners. It took less than 2 weeks for dust to get on sensor of my G12 and become noticeable enough that it ruined shots. When that happens it's buh bye time.
