Panasonic Lumix G1 Kludge Combines all the disadvantages of a P&S with the disadvantages of a D-SLR
SMS
has had. They're stuck with the contrast detection auto-focus system, so
shutter/focus lag is much slower than that of a digital SLR. Yet it's
still relatively large, and it weighs more than the lightest 4:3 digital
SLR.
Some 4:3 lenses can be used on the G1, via an adapter, but of course
that defeats much of the reason for going to Micro 4:3 (manual focus
must be use on some of the lenses, while auto-focus works on others).
I see Micro 4:3 as being the disc or APS film of the 21st century. It's
essentially a P&S camera with interchangeable lenses. If you can live
with the drawbacks of a P&S, save money and get a Canon G10. If you want
the advantages of a D-SLR, buy a D-SLR rather than this kludge.
Roy G
"SMS" <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote in message
news:RhhQk.4088$Ei5....@flpi143.ffdc.sbc.com...
Are you just trying to provoke what'is'name.
Roy G
SMS
<snip>
> Are you just trying to provoke what'is'name.
LOL, you mean "he who has many names?" No, I figured out how to filter
based on message ID, so now I filter all messages ending with "@4ax.com."
There was recently a thread about someone looking for something a little
smaller than their D-SLR, and they were considering a G10 but they
weren't willing to give up all the advantages of the D-SLR. Micro 4:3
seemed to hold some promise, and everyone thought that it was still a
ways away, but then Panasonic released the G1.
Micro 4:3 has turned out to be simply adding interchangeable lenses to a
P&S. Why would anyone buy Micro 4:3 rather than a long range ZLR? The
Micro 4:3 companies must assume that the reason D-SLR sales are
skyrocketing is because people want interchangeable lenses, but this is
not the major reason. D-SLR sales are rising because of other major
advantages, as outlined in the earlier thread, "Thirteen Reasons to
choose a Digital SLR over a Point and Shoot."
One advantage of Micro 4:3 over a ZLR is that you can have a smaller
package when using a wide angle versus a telephoto lens. It also has a
larger sensor, so presumably it won't suffer from the noise problems of
P&S cameras as much, though it's still a much smaller sensor than D-SLRs
from Canon, Nikon, Pentax, or Sony.
I can't imagine many people buying into such a crippled system as Micro
4:3. One of the major reasons to buy a digital SLR is to get rid of the
painful shutter lag caused by the slow contrast detection based
auto-focus, but at least the G1 retains contrast detection. I guess if
you would otherwise be using those funky lens adapters on a P&S in order
to increase the telephoto range or increase the wide angle, then Micro
4:3 would at least increase the quality, but anyone that cares about
image quality has already migrated to a digital SLR. Micro 4:3 is like
improving on a square wheel by making it triangular to eliminate one bump.
Ricoh used to offer phase-detection in a P&S so it's possible, but
expensive to do so.
Steve
Gerald Ford's Words from 1974 Come to Mind Today...
"My fellow Americans, our long national nightmare is over."
bmoag
The original Nikon Coolpix, now a paperweight on my desktop, was technically
a piece of cow excrement.
Should Nikon have abandoned digital image capture because their first
product stunk?
J. Clarke
What's "new" about the "paradigm"? It's just a half-sized RD-1 or M8
right down to using Leica glass. All that's missing is the Visoflex,
which I'm sure is coming.
--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
nospam
<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
> Early testing of the Micro 4:3 Lumix G1 confirms the fears that everyone
> has had. They're stuck with the contrast detection auto-focus system, so
> shutter/focus lag is much slower than that of a digital SLR.
<http://www.dpreview.com/previews/panasonicG1/page10.asp>
The good news is that - even in the prototypes we've tried -
Panasonic's engineers have kept true to their word; the focus is not
only astonishingly fast for a contrast detect system; it's easily as
fast as any conventional SLR in this class.
<http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/panasonic/dmc_g1-review/index.shtml>
Before I first used the G1, I had big concerns about focusing
performance. After all, contrast detect autofocus on traditional SLRs
is, well, awful. Panasonic has hit one out of the park with the G1 --
this camera focuses as quickly in live view mode as regular D-SLRs do
with their optical viewfinders
> Yet it's
> still relatively large, and it weighs more than the lightest 4:3 digital
> SLR.
panasonic has stated that they deliberately made as large as it is for
ergonomic reasons. also, this is just the first micro 4/3rds camera.
there will be others.
> Some 4:3 lenses can be used on the G1, via an adapter, but of course
> that defeats much of the reason for going to Micro 4:3 (manual focus
> must be use on some of the lenses, while auto-focus works on others).
most people will get micro 4/3rds lenses, but those who have existing
4/3rds lenses or want a particular focal length not yet offered in m43
can still use them if they want. hopefully there will be adapters for
nikon, canon, etc.
> I see Micro 4:3 as being the disc or APS film of the 21st century. It's
> essentially a P&S camera with interchangeable lenses. If you can live
> with the drawbacks of a P&S, save money and get a Canon G10. If you want
> the advantages of a D-SLR, buy a D-SLR rather than this kludge.
although the g1 is an interesting camera, the real appeal of micro
4/3rds are compact cameras with larger sensors.
J. Clarke
Which is what the G1 is.
nospam
<jclarke...@cox.net> wrote:
> > although the g1 is an interesting camera, the real appeal of micro
> > 4/3rds are compact cameras with larger sensors.
>
> Which is what the G1 is.
no, the g1 is a dslr. i'm referring to something like a canon g9 but
with a larger sensor.
Charles
<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
> LOL, you mean "he who has many names?" No, I figured out how to filter
> based on message ID, so now I filter all messages ending with "@4ax.com."
Are you aware that message ID's ending in "4ax.com" means that the user
is posting with the Forte Agent newsreader? That is a popular
newsreader so if you filter out messages on that you are filtering out
a broad swath of users that have nothing to do with your target. You
are filtering all users of Forte Agent.
--
Charles
dj_nme
No, the Panasonic DMC-G1 is not an SLR camera of any sort (digital or not).
The G1 has not got an optical TTL(1) viewfinder and is missing a reflex
system(2) which are the defining features of a SLR camera, digital or not.
Interchangeable lenses does not an SLR camera make, otherwise you would
have to also describe the Epson RD-1 and the Leica M8 as DSLR cameras
too, which these are demonstrably not.
The best way of describing the Panasonic DMC-G1 is as an EVIL(3) or
DIL(4) camera, simply because it uses an EVF(5) and has interchangeable
lenses.
(1) TTL = Through The Lens, IE: the "taking" or objective lens which
forms the image on the sensor or film inside the camera.
(2) flipping mirror, fixed pellicle mirror, beamsplitter, ETC
(3) EVIL = Electronic Viewfinder Interchangeable Lens
(4) DIL = Digital Interchangeable Lens
(5) EVF = Electronic ViewFinder
nospam
<49123bf2$0$22599$5a62...@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au>, dj_nme
<dj_...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
> >>> although the g1 is an interesting camera, the real appeal of micro
> >>> 4/3rds are compact cameras with larger sensors.
> >> Which is what the G1 is.
> >
> > no, the g1 is a dslr. i'm referring to something like a canon g9 but
> > with a larger sensor.
>
> No, the Panasonic DMC-G1 is not an SLR camera of any sort (digital or not).
> The G1 has not got an optical TTL(1) viewfinder and is missing a reflex
> system(2) which are the defining features of a SLR camera, digital or not.
> Interchangeable lenses does not an SLR camera make, otherwise you would
> have to also describe the Epson RD-1 and the Leica M8 as DSLR cameras
> too, which these are demonstrably not.
true, but it's a whole lot closer to a dslr than a compact digicam.
J. Clarke
Why, because it has interchangeable lenses?
ResidentTrollSpotter
Well, resident self-appointed net-cop net-trolls like SMS have never been too
bright. Besides, that field is easily changed on-the-fly in any version of
Agent.
GarrisonSmith
And isn't that a shame. It's still being drastically crippled by last-century's
SLOW, inaccurate, image distorting, image shaking, short-life-span, easy to
damage, costly to repair, obnoxiously loud, focal-plane shutter that exists in
all d-slrs.
Pity.
Just think of the photography improvements and cost, size, and weight savings if
they would just give up on perpetuating that ridiculously archaic mechanical
concept.
David J Taylor
[]
> (1) TTL = Through The Lens, IE: the "taking" or objective lens which
> forms the image on the sensor or film inside the camera.
> (2) flipping mirror, fixed pellicle mirror, beamsplitter, ETC
> (3) EVIL = Electronic Viewfinder Interchangeable Lens
> (4) DIL = Digital Interchangeable Lens
> (5) EVF = Electronic ViewFinder
I'm surprised that DEVIL has been coined!
DEVIL = Digital Electronic Viewfinder Interchangeable Lens
David
David J Taylor
> nospam wrote:
[]
>> true, but it's a whole lot closer to a dslr than a compact digicam.
>
> Why, because it has interchangeable lenses?
And a much larger sensor.
David
Mark Thomas
> Early testing of the Micro 4:3 Lumix G1 confirms the fears...
> so shutter/focus lag is much slower than that of a digital SLR.
Links and actual figures for this "early testing"?
J. Clarke
Much larger than in a Sony DSC-R1? Much larger than in a Sigma DP-1?
David J Taylor
> David J Taylor wrote:
>> J. Clarke wrote:
>>> nospam wrote:
>> []
>>>> true, but it's a whole lot closer to a dslr than a compact
>>>> digicam.
>>>
>>> Why, because it has interchangeable lenses?
>>
>> And a much larger sensor.
>
> Much larger than in a Sony DSC-R1? Much larger than in a Sigma DP-1?
Much larger than the "P&S" mentioned in the topic subject.
You raise an interesting sideline with those other two cameras - they
didn't seem to be all that successful as large sensor compact cameras.
The Sony was huge and heavy with its add-on lenses - and the DP-1 rather
specialised, with a dubious image quality reputation (deserved or not).
Will the G1 with true interchangeable lenses fare any better?
David
dj_nme
> J. Clarke wrote:
>> David J Taylor wrote:
>>> J. Clarke wrote:
>>>> nospam wrote:
>>> []
>>>>> true, but it's a whole lot closer to a dslr than a compact
>>>>> digicam.
>>>>
>>>> Why, because it has interchangeable lenses?
>>>
>>> And a much larger sensor.
>>
>> Much larger than in a Sony DSC-R1? Much larger than in a Sigma DP-1?
>
> Much larger than the "P&S" mentioned in the topic subject.
>
> You raise an interesting sideline with those other two cameras - they
> didn't seem to be all that successful as large sensor compact cameras.
> The Sony was huge and heavy with its add-on lenses - and the DP-1 rather
> specialised, with a dubious image quality reputation (deserved or not).
The lack of interchangeable lens for the Sony DSC-R1 and Sigma DP2
pretty much puts them in a seemingly dead-end.
Nothing else is really needed by the owner, conversion lenses to get
wider or longer can be bought more cheaply (at least cheaper than
Sony's) elsewhere, cases and straps and filters similarly.
Also, both of these cameras are in a bit of a no-man's land, not quite
as capable/adaptable as a DSLR camera and not as compact as a
small-sensor compact digicam.
The Sigma DP1 and DP2 aren't very big, but the lack of a zoom lens in a
fixed-lens compact seems problematic at best, IMHO.
> Will the G1 with true interchangeable lenses fare any better?
Consider that the only similar camera (small camera with large sensor
and an interchangeable lens) currently available is the Leica M8.2.
Unless the DMC-G1 is hideously over-priced, it should do okay at least.
I am personally more inclined to prefer the styling of the Olympus
mock-up of a Mu4/3 camera which they bandied about at FotoKina, it seems
more like something which could maybe fit in a pocket with a pancake
lens of some sort mounted.
dj_nme
I personally believe that DIL is the silliest version, one could easily
quip that "Only a dill would want a DIL camera".
That's something I'd never do. ;-)
J. Clarke
How about DILDO--Digital Interchangable Lens Devoid of Optical finder?
ASAAR
>> I personally believe that DIL is the silliest version, one could
>> easily quip that "Only a dill would want a DIL camera".
>> That's something I'd never do. ;-)
>
> How about DILDO--Digital Interchangable Lens Devoid of Optical finder?
Focusing with such cameras could be problematical in some lighting
conditions. The owner of one might then find themselves in a pickle.
Or vice-versa!