G1 discontinued?

[Rawfa]

Last week I went to pick up a G1 (as I’m interested in the GF1) for a test drive in a major electronics store (FNAC) they have told me that this model was being discontinued and that they would no longer sell it. I'm not sure if this is actually true or not, but taking in consideration the price difference between the G1 and the GF1 and their target audience it should be either this or a major price drop (even considering recent rebates).

 

[Vivek]

I think that is true. How can a better camera stay in the market while a (new) overpriced and underspecd camera is making its debut?

 

[Rawfa]

You didn't invent the G1, did you? ;-)

 

[Vivek]

No.

If I had:

1. The paint would have stuck where it is needed.

2. There would have been no "LUMIX" staring at anyone I point the camera at.:ROTFL:

3. Ergonomics would have been vastly better in place of logos and fake DSLR looks.

 

[pellicle]

sounds bizzare, but I just found one UK site suggesting the same

 

[iainmurray]

It would make sense if the G1 was being discontinued and production confined to the GH1.

 

[Terry]

Interesting as the new ads for the GF1 that feature the whole G series show the G1, GH1 and GF1. The only way I can see them completely getting out of the G1 would be to offer the GH1 with the 14-45 lit lens to make the package more affordable.

In the US panasonic.com was out of black G1's for quite a while and I too assumed that they were just going to sell out their blue/red inventory but now the black G1 is back in stock.

There is a subset of people that don't care about video and the G1 would be fine for them however, Panny may actually save money to keep it to one production line.

Vivek - while the GF1 doesn't suit you and you don't like the loss of features, it does suit other shooters that have different priorities. I would not have sour grapes over Panny announcing another camera that can further expand the market for m4/3. Market expansion will benefit all of us in the long run with more lenses and more bodies.

 

[Vivek]

I do not like sour grapes either. Facts, as I see them, are there. Who said I am right or wrong?

Enthusiasm over gear announcements or the lack of what a gear offers has nothing to do with how any market goes and it isn't any users responsibility.

Every camera maker has a marketing division, advertisment professionals and such ultimately paid for by the camera buyers.

Would the paint stick on any of the function buttons on the GF-1 longer than the LUMIX logo? An important question for some of us who may use it.

By posing such questions (and if the camera maker is aware of the awareness), I would expect better paint jobs on future cameras.

Not sour grapes but vitamines.

Let me add that a whole bunch of a brand fanatics, by claiming a defective camera with severe IR problems as the greatest, did a lot of damage to that brand than any of its critics.

 

[Terry]

I do not like sour grapes either. Facts, as I see them, are there. Who said I am right or wrong?

Enthusiasm over gear announcements or the lack of what a gear offers has nothing to do with how any market goes and it isn't any users responsibility.

Every camera maker has a marketing division, advertisment professionals and such ultimately paid for by the camera buyers.

Would the paint stick on any of the function buttons on the GF-1 longer than the LUMIX logo? An important question for some of us who may use it.

By posing such questions (and if the camera maker is aware of the awareness), I would expect better paint jobs on future cameras.

Not sour grapes but vitamines.

I should have quoted the post I was responding to. Your gripes about paint are real, and should be noted to Panasonic. No issues with that. My post about expanding the market was your quote about the GF1 being inferior and I just say it is different.

Here is the post
I think that is true. How can a better camera stay in the market while a (new) overpriced and underspecd camera is making its debut?

 

[Vivek]

How is not vitamines?

 

[Howard]

It would not surprise me that the G1 is discontinued. From my reading in these forums, the GH1 is more full featured G1. As someone else indicated in this thread, if Panasonic offers the GH1 with the 14-45 kit lens, the price of the G1 and GH1 should be similar. I think with the GH1 and GF1, Panasonic has strong product line up competing in the entry level interchangeable lenses market place. Due to their small size, they should be attractive for P&S users who want to move up on the quality scale as well as a substitute for DSLR users who want to shed the weight and bulk. Due to their ability with adapters to use premium legacy lenses, with their excellent manual focus capability, they also appeal to advanced photographers. I personally love the light weight of my G1 and have been pleased with my results. One of these days I will add an adapter and some faster legacy lens; although the faster 20mm 1.7 appeals to me and I may purchase one when they become available in quantity.

While I was not that excited about the Olympus EP-1, primarily due to its lower res LCD and lack of an EVF, I like the m4/3 cameras that both Panasonic and Olympus are offering. As indicated above and as an old Rollei TLR user, I do prefer the Panasonic G1 and GH1 because of the articulating LCD and the large, bright EVF. While I like the smaller size of the GF1, I am not sure that lower res, add on EVF of the GF1 will be sufficient enough for me to buy one.

 

[Brian Mosley]

I'm really glad that Panasonic have released an E-P1alike... it separates the brand fans from those who really do understand the difference between the G1 design and the E-P1/GF1.

I think the G1 is a better camera for some people, and the GF1 will be a better camera for others... and both will be great for those who appreciate the strengths of each! :thumbs:

I'd hate to see the G1 discontinued - unless the GH1 will drop in price to replace it.

Kind Regards

Brian

 

[RichA]

I'm really glad that Panasonic have released an E-P1alike... it separates the brand fans from those who really do understand the difference between the G1 design and the E-P1/GF1.

I think the G1 is a better camera for some people, and the GF1 will be a better camera for others... and both will be great for those who appreciate the strengths of each! :thumbs:

I'd hate to see the G1 discontinued - unless the GH1 will drop in price to replace it.

Kind Regards

Brian

GH1 isn't overpriced, being forced to buy the 14-140mm makes it expensive. It's like being forced to buy a Nikon D90 with a $1000 zoom. Make it available with the 14-45mm, and its price would be in-line (or less) than the current G1.

 

[Howard]

I agree with RichA:

"GH1 isn't overpriced, being forced to buy the 14-140mm makes it expensive. It's like being forced to buy a Nikon D90 with a $1000 zoom. Make it available with the 14-45mm, and its price would be in-line (or less) than the current G1."

 

[pellicle]

Hi

arguments over the price of the GH1 vs the G1 being on the lens alone are in my view naive, there are other differences in the product, and IT companies (recall Panasonic is an IT company) have long histories of selling exactly the same hardware at double the price of the lesser hardware which required only the 'golden screwdriver' to upgrade.

As can be seen on this table there is a sensor difference between the GH1 and the G1, so you can bet your bottom dollar that its not the 14-140 alone which makes the difference in price. The G1 and the GF1 share similar (if not the same) sensor.

If Panasonic are listening to this I would say that much of the market still likes Eye Viefinders (electric or otherwise) as many of us simply can't see what's on the screen without resorting to glasses. Now if you use glasses for close vision or distance vision there are diopter adjustments on the EVF to make all users equal, not so on the rear screen. This favors those with Myopia (poor distance vision) over the rest of the simply aging population.

I've been at a conference all week, and writing in dim conditions if I needed to rely on my rear view finder it would be for framing only. I use glasses to see what's in front of my face, but see the distance fine.

I'm not interested in video much, and while I am very eager to get a GF1 it is only because I already own the G1. I doubt I would buy the GF1 if I didn't own the G1 because the GF lacks an articulating screen (which I do use) and an EVF.

IF its true, then it looks to me like a strategy to shunt up the price and force features on me I don't need (like full HD video). Might be good for professionals who need it, but I'm sure that's a small market.

 

[Vivek]

That is the key difference. The video. I can not be bothered with that feature from any brand in any format.

As a camera, the G1's start up time is still way better than that of the GH1. This is important to me as the camera goes to sleep while idling.

 

[iainmurray]

I agree, Vivek. I don't want video either, but I fear there's going to be no resisting it. So-called combocams are what the producers are going to insist on giving us, whether we like it or not. Bootless to resist, as Michael Reichman pointed out in the Luminous Landscape when he wrote, "Does every still photographer need video. No – of course not. Many don't, and will resent the focus on them (so to speak). I'm old enough to remember when TTL metering, auto exposure, zoom lenses, autofocus, and of course Digital were all new, and all were disparaged by the cognoscenti. That's OK. Being an 'old fart' has nothing to do with chronological age, but everything to do with headspace."

Yours, an unashamedly old 'old fart'.

 

[pellicle]

Hi

I'm old enough to remember when TTL metering, auto exposure, zoom lenses, autofocus, and of course Digital were all new, and all were disparaged by the cognoscenti.

me too ... I never thought much of the pre TTL metering arguments, still have issues with AF and accordingly would never buy a camera which made manual adjustment impossible. I like P but still switch to Av or M when needed.

I don't mind if my camera has video either ... but I do mind if I'm expected to pay more for it and not given a choice. I recall that a pentax ME was actually cheaper than a Contax or a Topcon while giving me more features, that the cogniscenti did not consider the cameras "robust" shows their limited views.

As an old fart I happen to like choice and what the G1 offered was enough to encourage me to move over to that from about 20 years of Canon EOS use. Why is a longer story, but if I had to pay $1500 for the body I wouldn't be here .. I'd be back with Canon

 

[Vivek]

Iain, No harm in having combo cams as long as the camera's functions aren't compromised. If and when that happens, it is time to look for other brands that suit one's need.

We are in a great era with many choices. Formats, brands, etc are a thing of a past- at least for me.

Perhaps that would make me a "new fart"?

 

[woodmancy]

Iain, No harm in having combo cams as long as the camera's functions aren't compromised. If and when that happens, it is time to look for other brands that suit one's need.

We are in a great era with many choices. Formats, brands, etc are a thing of a past- at least for me.

Perhaps that would make me a "new fart"?

I think a new fart is an oxymoron, but I'll have to think about it.

Time to start and old fart's thread on the forum :deadhorse:

Keith