Downgrade - Is a GF-1 the answer?

EMA747

EMA747

Messages
2,070
Name
Andy
Edit My Images
Yes
I have become less and less interested in photography over the last few months. I have been building my Canon kit up but I have found that I just can't get motivated to go out and take pics. I think I have become too much of a perfectionist and don't take pics just for fun enough.

Anyway....I have been reading some very good things about the Panasonic GF-1 and wonder if it might be the answer. I like the idea of a camera that is not so big that I never take it with me. I saw some really nice colours in the tress were I was working today but of course my SLR was at home.

What I currently have is a 400D and Canon 17-40 L and 70-200 f2.8 L IS. They are obviously top quality lenses but I'm begining to wonder if I really need things that good and might be better off downgrading to the GF-1 and just getting out and taking pics more. Plus I'm finding it hard to justify the cost of all the above gear sitting in my house and being used twice a month max.


Sorry it's a long post but does anyone have any thoughts on the matter? :)
 
A lot of people seem to be doing similar things and realising that all the best kit in the world is useless if you can't be bothered to go out and use it.

I've just sold my 50D and some lenses to get the GF1 / 20mm as this will suit 90% of my photography at the moment :)

Go for it is what i say :thumbs:
 
I think you need to be avoid being sucked into the hype, and figure out why you are really not taking shots. It is really the size that is stopping you?

If it is size, why not just get a 18-55 kit lens, to go with the 400D? Its pretty small, and I imagine that imagine quality would be fine for your purposes.
 
I bought a Panasonic Lumix (not the GF1) a little over a year ago for much the same reasons, although it was as a means of carrying a camera at all times rather than replacing my SLR. I sold it within a couple of months. It wasn't that I didn't carry it all times, it was because the quality of image that even the best of compacts take, frankly, just doesn't cut it.
 
puddleduck said:
I think you need to be avoid being sucked into the hype, and figure out why you are really not taking shots. It is really the size that is stopping you?

If it is size, why not just get a 18-55 kit lens, to go with the 400D? Its pretty small, and I imagine that imagine quality would be fine for your purposes.
Click to expand...

I see your point. I'm not thinking of it just because of the hype though, it just seems like the right sort of camera for me. I like the look of the Lumix LX3 but the GF-1 looks much better at night (ISO levels) and I do like a good night shot. Also the greater DOF control is useful.

I am going to town this afternoon and I'll see if I can have a look at one in the flash to see how small it really is.

Another plus is the different lenses that can be used with it. One question on that topic...can it use old Olympus lenses with an adapter? I ask because my Dad has some old ones he used on his old Olympus OM1 that he never uses now.
 
Fair enough - personally with that horrid 2x crop factor, you effectively are not going to go much wider than 28mm with the kit lens.

Are you really going to be happy at an effective 28mm?

IMHO its a huge photographic compromise coming from a DSLR and its not exactly a cheap thing for a few ounces... your 400D will be much better in low-light.

Have a think about what you can do with 400D and a 18-55mm vs a GF-1 with the 14-45mm lens. Are you happy with those limitations?
 
aberal said:
I bought a Panasonic Lumix (not the GF1) a little over a year ago for much the same reasons, although it was as a means of carrying a camera at all times rather than replacing my SLR. I sold it within a couple of months. It wasn't that I didn't carry it all times, it was because the quality of image that even the best of compacts take, frankly, just doesn't cut it.
Click to expand...

I think I can live with less image quality. Part of the problem is that I only really put my pics on flickr so does top quality image quality really matter. Not to me so much these days. I had ideas of trying to make it as a pro a few years ago hence the reasons for upgrading to L glass. I now have no interest in that as a career so I now don't need to be as picky about image quality.
A few years back I took loads of pics when I went to visit my friend in Zurich and treated it like I was building up a professional collection of images. I was so lost in getting the perfect shot that I just wasn't enjoying taking pics and it became a bit of a burden to think this way all the time. I now feel I might get the love of photography back if I lost all the c**p and just took pics for fun. ;)
 
EMA747 said:
I now feel I might get the love of photography back if I lost all the c**p and just took pics for fun. ;)
Click to expand...

You don't need a new camera for that though... hence my question above about hype.

Its just another camera. With free hype ;)
 
aberal said:
I bought a Panasonic Lumix (not the GF1) a little over a year ago for much the same reasons, although it was as a means of carrying a camera at all times rather than replacing my SLR. I sold it within a couple of months. It wasn't that I didn't carry it all times, it was because the quality of image that even the best of compacts take, frankly, just doesn't cut it.
Click to expand...

There's a huge difference between the iq of compact and 4/3 sensor....

puddleduck said:
You don't need a new camera for that though... hence my question above about hype.

Its just another camera. With free hype ;)
Click to expand...

It's easier to carry about than even the smallest dslr and doesn't attract the sort of unwanted attention that a dslr can.
 
I just bought one of the Olympus and picture quality looks pretty good so far. Also got the OM adapter and trying out a 50mm f1.8 which is fun but I need practice with manual focus. Looking now for some more manual old lenses to play with.
 
aberal said:
True - although I was referring to my own experience. Same principles apply, although I'd be happy to be persuaded otherwise. :)
Click to expand...

I'd agree re compacts - even the G10 was pretty grim over 400 iso


800 iso

4074426663_3c28be4fa3.jpg



100% crop

4075197630_0d4b3de197_o.jpg
 
aberal said:
I bought a Panasonic Lumix (not the GF1) a little over a year ago for much the same reasons, although it was as a means of carrying a camera at all times rather than replacing my SLR. I sold it within a couple of months. It wasn't that I didn't carry it all times, it was because the quality of image that even the best of compacts take, frankly, just doesn't cut it.
Click to expand...

The GF-1 IS a SLR, not a compact. The image quality of the GF-1 is comparable to and with iso capability comparable to that of other entry level SLR's from Nikon and Canon.
I'm getting a GF-1 and I KNOW I'll shoot more, why? I'll carry the GF-1 with 20mm f1.7 in my backpack all the time as it weighs very little.
 
Hongsta299 said:
The GF-1 IS a SLR, not a compact. The image quality of the GF-1 is comparable to and with iso capability comparable to that of other entry level SLR's from Nikon and Canon.
I'm getting a GF-1 and I KNOW I'll shoot more, why? I'll carry the GF-1 with 20mm f1.7 in my backpack all the time as it weighs very little.
Click to expand...

Its definitely a compact :)

If you’ve been searching for DSLR performance from a smaller, lighter camera, look no further. The latest addition to the Lumix G family boasts a DSLR size sensor, a class-leading fast autofocus system and the option of an outstanding 20mm F1.7 super-bright pancake lens (one of two standard lens kits available). This gives the GF1 all the handling, control and responsiveness of a DSLR but in a more compact form.
Click to expand...

and

Ultra-Compact Body in 3 Colours

Lumix GF1 comes in an ultra-compact, stylish flat body weighing only 285g (body only)
Click to expand...

Straight from the Panny's mouth

:lol:
 
Well to be fair the term 'compact' is generally used to define a pocketable camera with limited features and a fixed lens.

The GF1 is more compact-ish in size, but far closer to an SLR in terms of ability.
 
it's not a compact or a DSLR / SLR, its and EVIL.

Electronic
Veiw(finder)
Interchangeable
Lens
 
I sold up and got a bridge some time ago - I found that the size of the bridge was refreshingly small, the footprint of the kit I was (not) lugging around was tiny and I had a load of cash realised from a hobby that I was not so interested in.

Months and months on I have a desire to come back to the DSLR market as picture quality does matter to me. I intend to buy what I want with knowledge rather than get into hype.

SO what if you sell up and re find yourself? Hope it doesn't cost too much!

Chris
 
Tulipone said:
I sold up and got a bridge some time ago - I found that the size of the bridge was refreshingly small, the footprint of the kit I was (not) lugging around was tiny and I had a load of cash realised from a hobby that I was not so interested in.

Months and months on I have a desire to come back to the DSLR market as picture quality does matter to me. I intend to buy what I want with knowledge rather than get into hype.

SO what if you sell up and re find yourself? Hope it doesn't cost too much!

Chris
Click to expand...
I did exactly the same as above...near enough.

I had a 40d and loads of lenses, got fed up with lugging them about and liked my Lumix TZ6 (still do) so decided to get a Leica D-Lux 4 but it had a dead pixel on the sensor so it was returned plus the IQ wasn't great. Nearly bought a Lumix GF1 as it was the closest to DSLR IQ ( with half decent lens) but thought it was too expensive for what it was, had a play with a 450d and fell in love, lighter, smaller & easier to use. I have bought just 1 decent L glass lens for it which will hopefully stay on 90% of the time and i have 3 old Manual focus lenses for playing with.

If you really want a 3/4 or compact the GF1 is the one to get but the Canon G11 is pretty awesome for what it is!
 
Chillimonster said:
it's not a compact or a DSLR / SLR, its and EVIL.

Electronic
Veiw(finder)
Interchangeable
Lens
Click to expand...



I've been dancing around with the thought of getting one of these for a while. Lens choices would be totally critical for it to be as versatile as my compact and slr kit combined ( asking way toooooo much I know, but that's me ) but the idea of camera that's "evil" is the biggest seller so far. :lol:
 
im doing this. Downsizing from a D80 to a GF1.
My reason is that using the D80 puts to much strain on my arm and with the neuropathic pain thanks to possible MS, its too much. After a day in the New Forest, even using a Monopod and then just using the 30mm, next day i suffered big time. Hardly used the camera since then.
Plus GF1 shoots video, which means no having to carry both video camera and still camera to school events.
 
I'd buy a relatively small / cheap prime (e.g. 24mm f2.8) to make the whole thing smaller and try carrying that around for a while.
 
why dont you just try it ?

treat it as a new lens purchase if you like.

if it doesn't do it, or indeed, if it DOES do it, and you get beck into it, you will be glad you kept your 400

or

if you like it so much, and it's perfect... THEN sell you other stuff.

just dont burn your bridges .

I have the 450 and find it small enough to choose a lens and go out for the day - carry it everywhere 'just in case'. I have a tiny bag that holds the 450 with a small prime (50/1.8) which is very carryable anywhere you want. The only thing I might want to change, is to get a wider angle for the cropped sensor. maybe a 28mm.

I have a few bags of various sizes. the one I use most is also very small and holds the 450 with the 55-250 attatched, and room for the 18-55. this combination is just about perfect for any walk about I can imagine. Maybe an 18-200 would be better, but I had these two as kit lenses with the body.

ok ... I'm rambling ... I'll stop :-)
 
slr
single lens reflex

no mirror..no slr
 
I've recently bought a GF1 and 20mm f1.7 and I'm very impressed.

There are big question marks over noise at ISO 800 and higher but if you're good at processing I expect that it can de dealt with. Manual focus is a bit of a pain and there are no markings on the lens so hyper focal focusing isn't exactly helped. There's also quite a bit of distortion but it seems to be well corrected in camera and in RAW too although you can probably dispense with the auto corrections if you want to start from scratch or you can just use a 3rd party RAW processor.

Other than that I find the camera is fast and responsive and a joy to use.
 
I have had a few second thoughts about my GF1 over the past few days ... not because I've had any issues but simply because it's human nature to always think that what you don't have is better.

Sure my D300 was a great camera but I just didn't go out and shoot. With the GF1 I've already taken more shots in the past two weeks than I did in two months with my D300.

So it's got me taking photographs which is a great start...

Secondly the quality does appear to be very good, although I'm no expert on this. However many others seem to agree.

At the end of the day it comes down to what suits your needs - for me it was the GF1.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top