• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Panasonic Lumix G1 (1 Viewer)

Link worked for me. For bird photographers, it will be a while before this replaces the other dSLRs, as a dedicated long lens is not planned for release soon; if you use a regular Olympus 70-300, will the weight difference be great enough that you would not prefer the Oly 520 instead?

Niels
 
If the link doesn't work for you just go to www.dpreview.com and look at the relevant article. I belatedly realise that someone else got there before me and posted a thread on the potential of this camera for digiscoping.

Looking at discussions about the camera on dpreview folks seem evenly split between those who think this is the best thing since sliced bread and those who think it's a dead-end (like previous attempts to produce small film SLRs). Personally, I think the latter are mistaken. I thnk that there's a huge new market out there formed by people like me who have migrated from point-and-shoot digital cameras to bridge cameras; we don't want to lug round larger cameras (and lenses) but want more flexibility than smaller cameras offer. For birders the suggestion (see other thread) that this could be a good vehicle for digi-scoping too must be an added attraction. No hint at prices yet, but I assume that the bodies, being simpler to build, ought to be cheaper than DSLRs, but, without the advantages of scale, the lenses may well be relatively more expensive and without so many options. Anyhow I'm very pleased I didn't buy an Olympus 410/510/520 as I was tempted to do as I suspect this 'family' will suit me better. I'm in no hurry so I probably won't rush out and get one. A second generation version should have any niggles ironed out and should have video (I swear it's been omitted for exactly that reason!),

John
 
I've somewhat belatedly also realised that this camera doesn't have in-body stabilisation - something I'd prefer rather than getting stabilised lenses. As I recall the Olympus 520 has this facility so perhaps it'd be sensible to see what camera they produce for this new class before rushing off and getting the Panasonic,

John
 
John

I do wonder if there'll be a rush to stick in body stabilisation in it. The whole idea of micro 4/3 concept seems to be as a back up for a main dSLR or a riposte to high-end compacts. I don't think they'll be expecting people to stick big telephotos on it.

as was commented above even if they do the difference in weight between an Olympus e-520 and a G1 isn't that great especially when you stick on a 70-300 lens and you want the adapter as well.

it looks like a great camera for someone wanting better than compact quality but without the bulk of a full sized dSLR. I suspect a Panasonic G1 paired with the 20mm f1.7 pancake lens would be a nice camera for that audience. equally I'm sure its not beyond the wit of Canon and Nikon to produce a pancake lens for their own entry level cameras.

you could get an Oly e-520 and go for a g1 or whatever plus adapter at a later date.
 
It looks as if this camera will retail (initially at least) at £600+ even if this includes a lens package rather than just the body, this little sense to me -economically or practically.

Surely, it ought to be cheaper to make than the Olympus 520 as there's no mirror mechanism to complicate things. Worse reading an interview with a top Panasonic manager (on dpreview) it seems unlikely that a dedicated large (500-600mm+) telephoto is unlikely to appear anytime soon.

I thought that the aim of this new generation of cameras was to tempt folks away from p&s bridge cameras. To make the camera more than twice as expensive as Panasonic's FZ50 whilst not catering for the desire for high end magnification strikes me as a disasterous marketing strategy. A shame as I'd have really like a handy SLR-esque camera with smaller than average zoom lenses. Lets hope Olympus are more sensible although their first offering in the mini-4/3rd format clearly isn't the replacement for bridge cameras that I'd like it to be,

John
 
To make the camera more than twice as expensive as Panasonic's FZ50 whilst not catering for the desire for high end magnification strikes me as a disasterous marketing strategy. A shame as I'd have really like a handy SLR-esque camera with smaller than average zoom lenses.
I agree with you to a certain extent. I think they should do both: continue to produce these new smaller cameras that take interchangeable lenses; but also produce "super-zoom" style cameras with fixed, high-magnification lenses for less money.

And also, they should produce fixed-lens P&S-like cameras to compete against the high-end small sensor cameras like the Canon G9 and G10. These high-end P&S cameras are trying to squeeze too many meagapixels into too small a sensor. The mini-fourthirds system should be able to wipe the floor with them!
 
It's now in Jessops for £549 (less £50 'cashback') with the 14-45 lens. Although 'face on' it doesn't look that much smaller than an SLR, it's much slimmer. I had hoped the micro-four-thirds set up would produce a smaller camera, but having now handled one I found it a very pleasant package ergonomically. With this set up I don't think I'd find much difference handling-wise from my FZ-30 as the 14-45 lens is very compact and neat. The view finder was superb - great how it comes on instantly as you hold it to your eye and the swivel screen a great bonus. It's about 90% the camera I want. However, I remain disappointed that the stabilisation was not 'in camera' and that there isn't a larger lens available. So I will 'hang fire' on this one until Panasonic or Olympus produce a) a camera with video capacity (which Panasonic promise next year) and b) there's a larger lens available. I wonder how far Olympus are holding back on their "SLR-esque" offering (which they must surely be planning) until they see how the opposition pans out,

John
 
FYI, the 45-200 (90-400 35mm) lens is already available and longer lenses should be much lighter for the G1 system than on DSLRs.

Piney

Thanks, Piney. I was aware of this lens and the size advantage, but thanks for reminding me. As noted elsewhere, though, I'd like something with as great [or greater] reach as the 'top end' bridge cameras [i.e. x12/x15/x18 range which is somewhat larger than 400mm], John
 
John,
I am not sure I know what you mean:

If you want a single lens with 18x zoom capabilities, then I dont see why you would want the exchangable lens capabilities in the first place, or why you wont go with a bridge camera; possibly something like the Fuji 100 (I forgot the letter combination) which has a larger sensor. The extreme zoom range of the bridge cameras probably cause a little more lens aberration than you should experience in a lens with shorter zoom such as 3-4x.

If you just want a lens where the maximum reach is beyond 400 mm equivalent, then you could combine the lens described here with a 1.4x converter (assuming that the regular olympus 1.4x will work with a lens such as this, or that someone will make a 1.4x converter for the system).

Cheers
Niels
 
John,
I am not sure I know what you mean:

If you want a single lens with 18x zoom capabilities, then I dont see why you would want the exchangable lens capabilities in the first place, or why you wont go with a bridge camera; possibly something like the Fuji 100 (I forgot the letter combination) which has a larger sensor. The extreme zoom range of the bridge cameras probably cause a little more lens aberration than you should experience in a lens with shorter zoom such as 3-4x.

If you just want a lens where the maximum reach is beyond 400 mm equivalent, then you could combine the lens described here with a 1.4x converter (assuming that the regular olympus 1.4x will work with a lens such as this, or that someone will make a 1.4x converter for the system).

Cheers
Niels

All I meant was that those used to a greater 'reach' would miss it here. Using a converter might be an option, but, as I understand it, there would be a price to pay in terms of optical quality in using a 1.4x converter. There would certainly be a price in terms of ease of use and convenience and, possibly, cost,

John
 
Been shooting away with my G-1 for about a week now and today have used the 45-200 zoom purchased yesterday. It's a great little ( and I do mean little) lightweight camera and lens sysem. With the right develpoment of lenses and accessories the Big Boys (Canon, Nikon, Sony, Pentax) better watch out! I understand that Leica could well be developing system lenses as well for it.
 
I saw the review too - very promising, but the relatively high price & lack of longer lenses (plus the omission of video capacity) put me off this camera. A pity too as image stabilisation isn't built in,
 
Guys,
I picked up a maroon G1 today for my birthday next week. With the kit lens and an 8 gig card it was approx. US770 . I'll post some comments in the next couple of days. Neil.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 14 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top