Finally a mirrorless SLR like camera but...

[Gondor]

I have been waiting for this several years and finally it happened and in many ways the G1 looks promising but still not for me I guess

I am not after smaller size than e.g. a Canon 450, instead I want someone to use the smaller size to give me more. A good walk around lens, lets say 28-250 mm (adjusted with the multiplier factor), fairly bright for low light shots and to enable me to control DOF. The sensor should be the best in the market, low noise and good image quality, which probably means an APS-C sized sensor.

Besides this I of course want the advantages with a good EVF/LCD, e.g. magnification while zooming, wysiwyg etc.

What I am hoping for is perhaps something that Samsung are willing to deliver or perhaps even Nikon in time. Canon could of course do it but I doubt they will unless they are loosing market shares.

 

[nickleback]

A good walk around
lens, lets say 28-250 mm (adjusted with the multiplier factor)
fairly bright for low light shots and to enable me to control DOF.

Define bright. f/2.8?

Good luck on that! Hope you have strong arms and a deep wallet. Even f/5.6 lenses in this range are relatively big and expensive.

--
Seen in a fortune cookie:
Fear is the darkroom where negatives are developed

 

[honza_pl]

APS-C, 28-250, big aperture and small sized ? sorry, but there are physical limits, it can't be done ... Look at size of APS-C DSLR zoom like Canon/Nikkor 18-200, Sigma 18-125 - middle sized and only 4-5.6.

 

[honza_pl]

Even f/5.6 lenses in this range are relatively big and expensive.

not so expensive, but you are right - not tiny and not superb IQ

 

[Erik Magnuson]

I have been waiting for this several years and finally it happened

What, did you miss the Sony R1?

someone to use the smaller size to give me more. A good walk around
lens, lets say 28-250 mm (adjusted with the multiplier factor),

OK, it was only 24-120mm, but fast, long and smaller a mutually exclusive options.

--
Erik

 

[JulesJ]

Yeh, and throw in a cure for Cancer and we'll all be happy. Perhaps you should have been in the camera design business and you might have an inkling as to what goes into product design...which I worked in for 21 years.

Just be happy with the amazing technology you are already getting. It seems the more we get the less happy we are.
jules

I have been waiting for this several years and finally it happened
and in many ways the G1 looks promising but still not for me I guess

I am not after smaller size than e.g. a Canon 450, instead I want
someone to use the smaller size to give me more. A good walk around
lens, lets say 28-250 mm (adjusted with the multiplier factor),
fairly bright for low light shots and to enable me to control DOF.
The sensor should be the best in the market, low noise and good image
quality, which probably means an APS-C sized sensor.

Besides this I of course want the advantages with a good EVF/LCD,
e.g. magnification while zooming, wysiwyg etc.

What I am hoping for is perhaps something that Samsung are willing to
deliver or perhaps even Nikon in time. Canon could of course do it
but I doubt they will unless they are loosing market shares.

--

A photograph is a secret about a secret. The more it tells you the less you know. Arbus.

 

[Kleber]

Yes, Sony abandoned the R1 design that could be improved regarding software and a superzoom lens plus a movie mode. I have a R1 and you can read in the reviews that no kit lenses have the same IQ the R1 Zeiss offers (only prime lens). So if you buy a SLR and do not spend an additional thousand (or thousands) dollars you have nothing compared to an R1.

I am waiting to something that replaces my R1 and my H2 together. It could be a 4/3 with a superzoom lens, movie and RAW. It would not be necessary to change lens.

The R1 also syncrhonises the flash up to 1/2000!

Specification is the soul of the products but it is also an weapon the camera manufactures have to segmentate their markets the way them want. Competition can save us.

What you think guys?

Kleber

 

[Anastigmat]

I have been waiting for this several years and finally it happened
and in many ways the G1 looks promising but still not for me I guess

I am not after smaller size than e.g. a Canon 450, instead I want
someone to use the smaller size to give me more. A good walk around
lens, lets say 28-250 mm (adjusted with the multiplier factor),
fairly bright for low light shots and to enable me to control DOF.
The sensor should be the best in the market, low noise and good image
quality, which probably means an APS-C sized sensor.

In any format, a wide zoom ratio is going to mean lesser image quality. You may get a few shots that you otherwise won't get but you pay dearly by having a vast majority of the shots you do get taken with a lesser lens.

Besides this I of course want the advantages with a good EVF/LCD,
e.g. magnification while zooming, wysiwyg etc.

What I am hoping for is perhaps something that Samsung are willing to
deliver or perhaps even Nikon in time. Canon could of course do it
but I doubt they will unless they are loosing market shares.

Canon is not allergic to making money. If the micro 4/3 format takes off, then both Canon and Nikon will have their own versions. For now, they are going to take a wait and see attitude. BTW, according to DPReview's description, the EV in the new camera is big and bright. That is probably a good thing since the Olympus 4/3 DSLR cameras suffer from tiny optical viewfinders.

 

[Jogger]

A good walk around
lens, lets say 28-250 mm (adjusted with the multiplier factor)
fairly bright for low light shots and to enable me to control DOF.

Define bright. f/2.8?

I want that well.. 28-250 f2.8 !! ..

Good luck on that! Hope you have strong arms and a deep wallet.
Even f/5.6 lenses in this range are relatively big and expensive.

--
Seen in a fortune cookie:
Fear is the darkroom where negatives are developed

 

[sinwen]

I expected a compact design with fixed zoom 2.8/14-50 and an external zoom-OVF and not a mimic of DSLR.
May be it will come a day.

BUT what is presented here is probably the most interesting and inovative camera of this Kina. It replaces hudge/bulky gear you leave home too often because you don't feel carrying a bag.

I guess this will fit into a jacket pocket and this is of course very acceptable, to me small size is a priority. As you have it with you most of the time, you get pictures you wouldn't have made otherwise.

When I bought my TZ3 it was most of the time into my pocket but the results were not good enough, so now it stays home most of the time.

This G1 could go without these useless scenes'modes , without many WB and parameters modes which are filling up the menus and are quite annoying.

It replaces a SLR whitch isn't what I was waiting for but let think about it and see what will be announce next in this Kina.

So would I buy it ? If the price is right, if we get first rate primes lenses and nice IQ in shadows/hight lights, there is good chance I plunge if nothing else more into my expectation is out.

 

[Gondor]

Hehe, no of course not f/2.8, I know what is physically possible. What I meant was that I prefer some more weight and cost to push it as far as possible.

For example, I look at the Canon 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6. I would be satisfied with slightly less range and if the lens was made for a mirror less camera it should be able to shrink it given the same spec or make it slightly faster. This is good enough for me if the camera has a very good sensor like Canons APS-C sized sensors.

A good walk around
lens, lets say 28-250 mm (adjusted with the multiplier factor)
fairly bright for low light shots and to enable me to control DOF.

Define bright. f/2.8?

Good luck on that! Hope you have strong arms and a deep wallet.
Even f/5.6 lenses in this range are relatively big and expensive.

--
Seen in a fortune cookie:
Fear is the darkroom where negatives are developed

 

[Gondor]

APS-C, 28-250, big aperture and small sized ? sorry, but there are
physical limits, it can't be done ... Look at size of APS-C DSLR zoom
like Canon/Nikkor 18-200, Sigma 18-125 - middle sized and only 4-5.6.

--

But you missed the point, first of all I don't have that high requirements as most seemed to think when it comes to aperture, see my post above. Secondly, a mirror less approach will shrink the camera system given the same spec, however I would like to use this in order to keep the size but to improve the spec.

 

[Erik Magnuson]

18-200mm f/3.5-5.6. [...] if the lens was made for a
mirror less camera it should be able to shrink it given

The shorter backfocus only helps in making smaller normal and moderate wide angle lenses. A 200 (or even 125mm) lens is going to be about the same length independent of mount. Diameter will depend on speed and size of the lens motor mechanics..

--
Erik

 

[Joe0Bloggs]

But a 18-200 starts at wide angle. One can make use of the shorter backfocus to make design for the wide end lens configuration easier.

18-200mm f/3.5-5.6. [...] if the lens was made for a
mirror less camera it should be able to shrink it given

The shorter backfocus only helps in making smaller normal and
moderate wide angle lenses. A 200 (or even 125mm) lens is going to
be about the same length independent of mount. Diameter will depend
on speed and size of the lens motor mechanics..

--
Erik

 

[Gondor]

18-200mm f/3.5-5.6. [...] if the lens was made for a
mirror less camera it should be able to shrink it given

The shorter backfocus only helps in making smaller normal and
moderate wide angle lenses. A 200 (or even 125mm) lens is going to
be about the same length independent of mount. Diameter will depend
on speed and size of the lens motor mechanics..

--
Erik

Looking at the review of G1 I think it is some difference and to quote the comment in the review of the picture below: "The new smaller lens mount and reduced flange back distance means that Micro Four Thirds lenses are noticeable smaller than their conventional SLR counterparts - even the already diminutive 14-42mm Olympus kit lens."

 

[Erik Magnuson]

But a 18-200 starts at wide angle. One can make use of the shorter
backfocus to make design for the wide end lens configuration easier.

Not if the new Panny 14-45mm or 45-200 are any guide. They're mainly a little smaller in diameter than equivalent 4/3 or APS-C lenses. Now it does wonders for the near-normal 20mm f/1.7 ...

--
Erik

 

[Erik Magnuson]

Looking at the review of G1 I think it is some difference and to
quote the comment in the review of the picture below: "The new
smaller lens mount and reduced flange back distance means that Micro
Four Thirds lenses are noticeable smaller than their conventional SLR
counterparts - even the already diminutive 14-42mm Olympus kit lens."

http://a.img-dpreview.com/previews/PanasonicG1/Images/features/lenses.jpg

You see a "noticeable" difference in that photo? They are almost exactly the same length. The new lens is a bit slimmer in diameter though. If you compare the Panny 45-200 vs. the Sigma 55-200, the Sigma is shorter and almost the same diameter.

--
Erik

 

[Gondor]

Looking at the review of G1 I think it is some difference and to
quote the comment in the review of the picture below: "The new
smaller lens mount and reduced flange back distance means that Micro
Four Thirds lenses are noticeable smaller than their conventional SLR
counterparts - even the already diminutive 14-42mm Olympus kit lens."

http://a.img-dpreview.com/previews/PanasonicG1/Images/features/lenses.jpg

You see a "noticeable" difference in that photo? They are almost
exactly the same length. The new lens is a bit slimmer in diameter
though. If you compare the Panny 45-200 vs. the Sigma 55-200, the
Sigma is shorter and almost the same diameter.

--
Erik

Yes the old lens is noticeable wider than the micro lens even though it's a 14-42 lens compared to the new micro lens which is 14-45.

No big differences I agree but still an improvement, if I can get the same size but with slightly better spec I say yes.

 

[Erik Magnuson]

Yes the old lens is noticeable wider than the micro lens

A whopping 5mm according to the specs (60mm vs. 65mm).

No big differences I agree but still an improvement, if I can get the
same size but with slightly better spec I say yes.

If you are happy with a few mm here or there, then that's fine. But except for primes in a narrow range (like the 20mm f/1.7), that's about all you'll get.

--
Erik

 

[Gondor]

Yes the old lens is noticeable wider than the micro lens

A whopping 5mm according to the specs (60mm vs. 65mm).

10% that is at the same time as the range increased by 7 %