D90 vs G2, G1, GF1

P

plymman

Messages
148
Edit My Images
No
Hi all, I have a d90 which is fantastic but bulky to take out all the time, the G1 and G2 have just come to my attention but I understand they are not true slr cameras. I realise the limitations of the lens selection but everyone who has one seems to love them.

If I was to hang up my d90 fir one of this, what, if any, would I be losing in picture quality/functionality? Would I have to be trawling through menus for things like iso etc..? Woul I regret the decision? I'd like to save on bulk but nit at the expense of too much image quality.
 
As you will know the G1 and G2 have removable lenses so the only real differences to an SLR are that they don't have a mirror, they have EVF's and they're smaller. Only you can decide if these camera's are smaller enough to make a difference.

I went for a GF1 with a 20mm f1.7 lens and I doubt I'll be buying any more lenses. This gives me a quality compact camera as an alternative to my DSLR. The GF1 isn't compact enough to fit into a trouser pocket, but then neither were most of the 35mm cameras we used just a few years ago.

I'm not too sure that you'll give up much if anything on IQ, higher ISO may not be as good but the GF1 images can take a lot more processing than my Canon 20D shots before they start to look bad and as your Nikon, like my 20D, isn't exactly the latest DSLR on the market you might be pleasantly surprised by FT or MFT.
 
Personal opinion . . .

Recently went this rout, looked at the GF1, we could not cope with the fixed viewing screen option (tourist stance!:thumbsdown:) the EVF option is expensive and not that good.

We needed a light camera, so went the G1 rout, the EVF is much better. Great pictures, but takes some getting used to IMHO . . . I have the 14-45 and the 45-200 lens, cant be bothered with the long lens, so that will probably be sold. Essentialy for us, this is a light, one lens camera, capable of some excelent pictures. Start adding addaptors and old prime lenses . . . what was the point in going light and small in the first place?

Incidently, the camera was for my partner, she needs light and idealy an animated screen, I use it occasionaly:naughty:

CJS
 
woof woof said:
I went for a GF1 with a 20mm f1.7 lens and I doubt I'll be buying any more lenses. This gives me a quality compact camera as an alternative to my DSLR.
Click to expand...

Do you still have use for your SLR or has the GF1 done away with the need?
 
CJS said:
Personal opinion . . .

Recently went this rout, looked at the GF1, we could not cope with the fixed viewing screen option (tourist stance!:thumbsdown:) the EVF option is expensive and not that good.

We needed a light camera, so went the G1 rout, the EVF is much better. Great pictures, but takes some getting used to IMHO . . . I have the 14-45 and the 45-200 lens, cant be bothered with the long lens, so that will probably be sold. Essentialy for us, this is a light, one lens camera, capable of some excelent pictures. Start adding addaptors and old prime lenses . . . what was the point in going light and small in the first place?

Incidently, the camera was for my partner, she needs light and idealy an animated screen, I use it occasionaly:naughty:

CJS
Click to expand...

In which case why not go for something like a G11 or bridge camera? What is the point on spending more for a camera with interchangeable lenses if you only want a single standard zoom?
 
If I were to consider one, what are the main differences and what would be the bet buy between:
G1
G2
GH1
GF1?
 
plymman said:
If I were to consider one, what are the main differences and what would be the bet buy between:
G1
G2
GH1
GF1?
Click to expand...

You can compare the cameras on the Panasonic website. Here's a link which displays an overview of all the specs/features, compared to the other three:

http://www.panasonic.co.uk/html/en_...lt.html?p=DMC-G2&p=DMC-GF1&p=DMC-GH1&p=DMC-G1

As for the 'best buy', that is mostly up to you - your budget, your needs/wishes/wants/usage pattern.. we can not tell you which camera would be best for you without you providing us with sufficient information to narrow down the choices.

For example, if you *need* a viewfinder, you might not want the GF1, as a viewfinder is an (expensive) optional, whereas the other three have them built-in.
 
Id like to shoot video and want the best image quality although I assume the sensors are all much of a muchness. Budget isn't key but if I can pick one up for the price I can sell my d90 and lenses for I'll be happy. I don't want to compromise on quality but could do with a smaller lighter kit than my d90, that's my only requirement. Landscapesand photos of my kids are all I'll really be shooting.

I'd like a viewfinder but I guess that might not be an issue with an accurate and responsive screen. I'd like to avoid delving into menus to adjust thing like iso and exposure compensation if that's possible
 
Amp34 said:
In which case why not go for something like a G11 or bridge camera? What is the point on spending more for a camera with interchangeable lenses if you only want a single standard zoom?
Click to expand...

Very simple, great IQ delivered by a decent size sensor, plus a superb lens! And I only paid £349 for the G1, with all the discounts and money back offers . . . 'SMOKIN':wave:

CJS :naughty:
 
Amp34 said:
In which case why not go for something like a G11 or bridge camera? What is the point on spending more for a camera with interchangeable lenses if you only want a single standard zoom?
Click to expand...

I dont see why I need to explain myself any further Amp34, however I will, just so that you and any one genuinely looking will know . . . :|

Sensor, price, image quality, and my partner will have most use, these you already know.

A little deeper; my partner is disabled and therefor cant stand up straight, 'need animated screen'. Animated screens are not so readily available in the present breed of 'top of range?' bridge cameras. Current bridge cameras nearly all sport the ridiculous x25 to x30 zoom, impossible to use (even with IS technology) with out a decent tripod, quality ain't that good in such super zoom lenses, so its something not worth paying!

So its came down to the G11 or G1 . . . as everything is comparable other than lens and sensor . . .

Thats until you 'research', and discover the picture comparison feature in the G1, choose a setting and the camera will show the new image as a comparison before you press the shutter. My partner is new'ish to picture taking, it seemed a good idea to be able to go out, with just one camera, all pictures will be viewed on screen, so we are able to discuss the options together . . . That way she learns and we have an enjoyable day together :love:

I hope you understand now Amps, things are not always as they seem on the surface . . . :)

CJS

PS, I bought the 45-200 lens after s/h, in a moment of poor judgment . . . its OK, but large, and not in the same IQ as the 14-45 as you get to wards the longer end, hence it will probably be sold. Most of my pictures these days, are taken with a Nikon 18-70mm so the 90mm on the G1 Is no hardship, not so much more reach in the G11 . . .
 
CJS said:
PS, I bought the 45-200 lens after s/h, in a moment of poor judgment . . . its OK, but large, and not in the same IQ as the 14-45 as you get to wards the longer end, hence it will probably be sold.
Click to expand...

Is the 45-200 that bad? One of the big draws for me was the reach of the 200mm lens
 
CJS - I would be interested in the 45-200 if you want to sell it on ;)

Daniel.
 
Go for it amnesia :D

(incidentally - what setup do you use to attach the Raynox DCR250 to your G1 - would it work for the GF1?)
 
neenee said:
Go for it amnesia :D
Click to expand...

Bit annoyed I missed the one you got the other day :bang:

neenee said:
(incidentally - what setup do you use to attach the Raynox DCR250 to your G1 - would it work for the GF1?)
Click to expand...

Yes it would work fine... The G1 and GF1 are basically the same camera, except for packaging and HDvid on the GF1. The DCR-250 comes with a clip on adapter which grips the inside thread of whatever lens you're using. It's best to use the lens at it's longest focal length, so for me at 45mm. 200mm would give you higher magnification.

Not as good as a dedicated macro lens, but a whole lot cheaper !!!
:thumbs:
 
"Do you still have use for your SLR or has the GF1 done away with the need?"

I still have my DSLR but now I have more options just like in the old days when I had an SLR and a nice compact too.

IMVHO the GF1 is the first camera that offers a viable alternative to a DSLR in the way that a quality film compact once offered (or still does offer) a viable alternative to a film SLR.
 
amnesia said:
Bit annoyed I missed the one you got the other day :bang:
Click to expand...

:|

amnesia said:
Yes it would work fine... The G1 and GF1 are basically the same camera, except for packaging and HDvid on the GF1. The DCR-250 comes with a clip on adapter which grips the inside thread of whatever lens you're using. It's best to use the lens at it's longest focal length, so for me at 45mm. 200mm would give you higher magnification.

Not as good as a dedicated macro lens, but a whole lot cheaper !!!
:thumbs:
Click to expand...

Ah, cool :D I'll have to take a look at that then - thanks for the prompt reply.
 
plymman said:
Is the 45-200 that bad? One of the big draws for me was the reach of the 200mm lens
Click to expand...

No its not that bad, I just dont have the need for it, or should I say my Hazel will be unlikely to use it, its simply to big for her. . . . The jury is out on the 'For Sale' option? I suppose it will depend on what its worth???

CJS
 
I see you have a D5000 too CJS, how do you find the IQ and focus speed of the GF1 compared to the Nikon?
 
plymman said:
I see you have a D5000 too CJS, how do you find the IQ and focus speed of the GF1 compared to the Nikon?
Click to expand...

Correction, I have the G1 . . . same difference, sorry being pedantic :D

The D5000 is very quick on TTL focus, LV is slow. That does not make the G1 slow, on the 14-45 lens, its quick enough and only uses LV.

Picture quality . . . Thats down to the lens, if I compare my Nikon 18-70 to the Panasonic 14-45. G1/14-45 can be pin sharp to a fault??? some will like that, I do, but the D5000/18-70, has something that for me, is that 'something' you cant put your finger on???

The one thing I can say, I am confident, which ever camera I am using at the time, I will get the IQ I expect!

Originally I was planing on selling one or other camera, depending on how things shaped up, expecting the Nikon to be the potential fall guy? It looks like its a dead heat so far, some might say, I'm a Nikon man at heart? As such, I doubt either will be sold, only possibly the 45-200 lens?:thinking:

CJS

PS, It may tell you something 'Plymman' I down graded from the D90 to a D5000, I find, 'less is more' . . .
 
You could check out my flickr to see some examples taken with the GF1 (and G1 in fact) :)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/18244158@N00/

I've only used DSLRs a little to compare to - but essentially in most situations I don't think there is much difference - the high ISO performance is a little less good (or in some cases a lot less good). I've still got plenty of pics in poor light that I'm very happy with though. Also the AF speed is not as good, but still fine for most things.

I really enjoy using old MF lenses on mine too - some that won't adapt onto SLRs that are amazing for the price like some of the Konica Hexanons.
 
CJS said:
I dont see why I need to explain myself any further Amp34, however I will, just so that you and any one genuinely looking will know . . . :|
Click to expand...

That post wasn't meant to be a challenge, just a question. Just seemed a bit strange to spend more money (I was assuming you spent around £450) on something with very little/no difference in ability.:)

I do have one question however, what is an animated screen?

I had contemplated changing my equipment for a GF1 and a couple of lenses a month or two ago but found it was just too compromised for the size/space saving. The lack of a "cheap" remotely wide lens and the poor telephoto range just made it seem silly. Alongside the lack of viewfinder and other issues. :)
 
Amp34 said:
That post wasn't meant to be a challenge, just a question. Just seemed a bit strange to spend more money (I was assuming you spent around £450) on something with very little/no difference in ability.:)

I do have one question however, what is an animated screen?

I had contemplated changing my equipment for a GF1 and a couple of lenses a month or two ago but found it was just too compromised for the size/space saving. The lack of a "cheap" remotely wide lens and the poor telephoto range just made it seem silly. Alongside the lack of viewfinder and other issues. :)
Click to expand...

OK, an 'animated screen', one that is hinged and swiveled, usable at any angle, as fitted on the G1.

The GF1 is only practical IMHO, if you want good IQ but need small(ish) size, this requires the use of the 20mm pancake lens. As soon as you start to look at a 'lens collection', it is pointless. Some enthusiasts have gone the G1 rout and started to buy various old lenses, requiring an adaptor, making them only usable in manual mode??????

The G1 however, was offered at a bargain price, has a very good EVF, and out performs, IMHO, all other options at that level, short perhaps of the bridge cameras with ridiculously over stretched super zoom lenses, which cant work properly over their full range without a tripod and remote release . . . :shrug: As you say whats the point . . . ?

The jury is out on keeping the G1? As I still prefer the D5000, my partner has not had chance to try the G1, having only come out of hospital recently, the results of the hospital treatment look positive at the moment, so we will see how she gets on. You never know, she may still prefer her Canon A640 with animated screen? In which case there will be a complete G1 outfit for sale:thinking:

Now you know the whole story . . . :)

CJS
 
Just a quick thought on the GF1 being pointless if you buy more lenses...

I don't think that this is true at all.

I've decided that the GF1 and 20mm f1.7 is just what I want as for me it acts almost perfectly as a digital replacement for the quality compact 35mm cameras some of us used years ago. I only ever had one lens on those cameras, something between 35mm and "standard," therefore a GF1 with just one "standard" lens is just what I was looking for.

There's nothing to stop others buying more lenses and as we've seen on this site the results obtainable (if you have the skill) are good. If you go down the multi lens route you don't have to take them all with you and you therefore still retain the ability to take a small quality camera with you and the only difference is that you have more flexible options. One day you can take a longer or wider lens and another day you can take the most compact package, the camera and the 20mm. I don't see that as pointless at all.
 
I agree with woof woof.

Even if you bring multiple lenses, your netto weight/size will still be smaller with the GF1. When you're hiking/climbing even the smallest space/weight savings can be very useful. I do concede that might be a 'niche' of sorts as it's not always the case that you'd notice much of a difference, but I know I do prefer to make my packs as compact as possible, so for me it's a plus.

CJS - I hope she'll recover without any after-effects.
 
Exactly. The reason I was looking into it was I was planning on heading away and living out of a backpack for a few months/year (not "backpacking" like students do for a gap year but something different). Now I'm only heading out for a month and the quite significant saving in size and weigh just isn't good enough for the loss of options.
 
neenee said:
CJS - I hope she'll recover without any after-effects.
Click to expand...

Mmm . . . always more ways than one 'of skinning a cat', always more angles, my view is, a GF1/20mm is a balanced, small IQ combination. From there; 'little and large', of course it works, even offers flexibility of a sort. However, IMHO, there are better options . . . a G1 for instance:lol:

Thanks neenee, Hazel says, she is feeling better :shrug: . . . you know women, however, the operation was only pain blocking, she will never stand straight again . . .

CJS
 
can anyone post or link to any low light samples or photo's of people/kids etc.r unning and jumping? This could be the deciding factor...
 
They Dont seem to suffer from the kind of blur I might expect. Some of the reviews I've read seem to make out that it's almost impossible to get a sharp picture of a moving child which is a worry for me seeing as I mostly take family shots. Looking at you photos though maybe this is a little unfounded.
 
With a GF1 if shooting indoors in lower light I select auto ISO and shutter priority and set at 1/40 or 1/50 as other modes seem to set the shutter speed a little too slow.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top