The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

GF1 compared to E-P1

barjohn

New member
The first thing I noticed on opening the box is that the GF1 seems smaller than the E-P1. Total volume is probably pretty close but the difference in width really makes it seem smaller.

The build quality feels better to me than the G1 and I think it is the metal body that gives that visual/psychological perspective. For some reasons the buttons feel better than the ones on the G1 that felt very tiny. Compared to the E-P1 I can't say that the difference is better or worse, just different.

The LCD is an area that is a mixed bag. While the GF1 has a higher resolution screen, it is not as bright and vibrant as the E-P1's screen and in bright sunlight where you are shooting toward the light both screens are really unusable but the GF1's is considerably worse. Part of the problem is the contrast on the GF1 screen is very low and the colors look pale and washed out in comparison to the E-P1's screen. I cranked up the GF1's contrast to max to give the images some color depth. On the GF1 the LCD is not recessed meaning you really need to put a screen protector on it (I put one on the E-P1 too as it isn't very recessed either). One area where the GF1 LCD did much better than the E-P1 is in low light. On the E-P1 the screen becomes very noisy and the colors wash out while on the GF1 in the same lighting (same lens on both cameras) the GF1 screen was vibrant, bright and almost noise free.

Focus speed with 20mm f1.7 and 17mm f2.8. I couldn't accurately time with a stop watch but my estimation using a 1,000 One count is that the GF1 is about twice as fast as the E-P1 with either lens. It seemed that the 20mm Panasonic lens was a little faster but we are talking small amounts in the same low light such that at ISO 200 and f2.8 the shutter speed was 4. In brighter light both cameras get faster. I can't say that the focus speed is so different as to make one unusable compared to the other. In very low light the focus assist light on the GF1 comes to the rescue and it is absent from the E-P1. In these circumstances, a virtually dark room, the E-P1 cannot find focus and the GF1 does very quickly.

White balance. The E-P1 wins this one hands down. I had to adjust the WB settings for every shot done in AWB on the GF1. I could minimize the amount of adjustment if I selected a preset that made the image appear to be close but with the E-P1 the color was so close as shot that I didn't need to mess with it unless I was being super critical. Panasonic could learn something from Olympus on this aspect. Maybe by the next firmware release (currently version 1.0 for both body and lens) we will see a major improvement.

Write speed and speed to preview. The E-P1 takes about 6-7 sec before you can hit the play button and look at and zoom your image (you have to wait for the blinking write light to stop). With the GF1 it is almost instantaneous.

Exposure. This is a tricky area and it is clear that Olympus is pulling a few tricks here with their exposure curve. I set up a tripod and mounted each camera on it and took a series of pictures from ISO 100 to 3200 using the same 20mm lens wide open on both. The first go around I used spot focus and spot exposure. I used the camera viewfinder cross hairs to focus on the same spot in the image with each camera and to frame the shots as close as possible. Lighting conditions were identical and all shots were taken within minutes of one another. WB was set to auto on the first round and later I changed the WB on the GF1 to get closer to what I was seeing with my eyes. On the first series of tests, I got the following values:

E-P1 GF1
3 200 10 200
6 400 20 400
13 800 40 800
25 1600 80 1600
50 3200 160 3200

When I looked at the histograms, the E-P1 files were all over exposed to the right.

After I changed to area exposure on each camera things changed again. Finally I decided to see what happened if I set the GF1 to read the scene and then set both cameras to shoot the same shutter speed and same f-stop at each ISO setting. With both cameras, over exposing to the right and then bringing it down in post processing results in much cleaner images. The JPGs on the E-P1 are generally superior to the GF1 and on the GF1 I had to switch to vivid mode while I shot on natural on the E-P1. As you can see if the shutter speed and f-stop are equal at ISO 32 the E-P1 just barely ekes past the GF1 in IQ performance in raw in some cases and loses in others. All of the comparison images are in LR at 1:1.

I then shot some hand helds where I used the flash on the GF1 and no flash on the E-P1. In most cases the E-P1 images were much sharper and the GF1, though shot at a faster shutter speed showed image blur and it took me trying multiple shots before I would get a sharp one on the GF1 unless I forced the shutter speed up to over 100 with the flash. The in body IS is definitely a BIG plus for the E-P1. The E-P1 does tend to blow out the highlights as you can see in the outdoor shots. Also, note when set to the same shutter speed, the E-P1 tends to under expose the image thus making it actually noisier.

I will do some more testing tomorrow and post the results.
 
Last edited:

Brian Mosley

New member
Yes, thanks John... much appreciated. What SDHC card are you using, by the way? my Extreme III 4GB card clears the E-P1's 9 shot raw buffer in about 10 seconds.

How many raw shots does the GF1 store in the fast internal buffer? and how long does it take to clear the buffer to your card?

Cheers, looking forward to more example shots with that 20mm f1.7!

Brian
 

pellicle

New member
John

yes, indeed! Thanks ...

The build quality feels better to me than the G1 and I think it is the metal body
did you say metal body? I'm not sure I've missed this before but you mean the GF1 has a metal body!

wow that's really attractive.

thanks for the images.

May I ask an addition of the test? I find that JPG images from my G1 give blinking highlights on the screen but do not in fact have that in the RAW file (using dcraw -4 -T to convert). This leads me to think that their JPG engine is a little ... err ... challenged. It has accordingly challenged me in setting exposure to optimally expose right on my camera.

I'd be very interested to know if you find similar between GF and EP. I expect that a manual exposure setting may be the easiest to work with.

Thanks
 

DjordjeJ

New member
Thanks for interesting comparsion. I am still uncertain which camera to buy, but since Panasonic is not available in Serbia, and E-P1 is in stores, a will probably get E-P1.
 

pellicle

New member
Ahhh har

... I read more carefully the preview here.

That said, though it doesn't wear its retro design cues on its sleeve like the Olympus E-P1, it's a handsome camera that (thanks to the almost full metal jacket) has a quality feel.
nice one centurion ... like it!
 

Terry

New member
John



May I ask an addition of the test? I find that JPG images from my G1 give blinking highlights on the screen but do not in fact have that in the RAW file (using dcraw -4 -T to convert). This leads me to think that their JPG engine is a little ... err ... challenged. It has accordingly challenged me in setting exposure to optimally expose right on my camera.

I'd be very interested to know if you find similar between GF and EP. I expect that a manual exposure setting may be the easiest to work with.

Thanks
Most of my cameras do the same...This is not unusual.
 

retow

Member
Thank you for posting this, very helpfull comparison, indeed. Helped me to hold back on pulling the trigger on a GF1, but ordered only the Pana 20mm instead, which will get used on the EP1. It seems as if both cameras are capable, with different strengths going for one or the other. From first comparisons showing up on the net it looks as if the Pana lenses (14-45 and 20) combined with the EP1 could provide the best compromise for some of us.
 

Cindy Flood

Super Moderator
...snip...

May I ask an addition of the test? I find that JPG images from my G1 give blinking highlights on the screen but do not in fact have that in the RAW file (using dcraw -4 -T to convert). This leads me to think that their JPG engine is a little ... err ... challenged. It has accordingly challenged me in setting exposure to optimally expose right on my camera.

I'd be very interested to know if you find similar between GF and EP. I expect that a manual exposure setting may be the easiest to work with.

Thanks
You might find this article on Luminous Landscape (written by Ray Maxwell) helpful. http://luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/right-hista.shtml
Some people might be blaming their camera when it is their settings that are at fault.
 

barjohn

New member
I will be doing some more testing today and posting some follow up to the questions posed here. The Panasonic lenses are definitely superior to the Olympus ones in my opinion. The Panasonic's are heavier and noisier that is the negative but the Panasonic's appear to focus faster and have better optics.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
The Panasonic's are heavier and noisier that is the negative but the Panasonic's appear to focus faster and have better optics.
Heavier is a good thing (Oly m4/3rds lenses are flimsy ). If your Pana lenses are "noisier", you need to find other samples.
 

Terry

New member
The only lens that makes noise is the 20mm pancake and the lens element that has to be moved for focus is big and heavy. All the others are very quiet especially the 14-140 so as not to have lens focusing noise in videos.
 

Diane B

New member
Hi



well ... sorta ... after using my 10D for quite some time I was quite surprised when I converted my first few raw files on the G1 ...
I just turned my blinkies off in the G1 (and GF1). Solved that LOL--and I think I can read it just from histo pretty well now after processing a lot of files. The blinkies were distracting--and, as you say, usually not right. I always have just shot in RAW.
 

Diane B

New member
I cranked up the GF1's contrast to max to give the images some color depth. QUOTE]

After reading the article on LL about getting best histo for RAW--this would conflict. I know with my Canons I always kept them 'neutral' so as to get best RAW histo (even though no on screen). I'm going back and checking my settings on both the G1 and GF1.
 

Cindy Flood

Super Moderator
I cranked up the GF1's contrast to max to give the images some color depth. QUOTE]

After reading the article on LL about getting best histo for RAW--this would conflict. I know with my Canons I always kept them 'neutral' so as to get best RAW histo (even though no on screen). I'm going back and checking my settings on both the G1 and GF1.

Diane, Exactly. That is why I pointed to the LL article. That method of testing is flawed IMHO.
 

barjohn

New member
Cindy and Dianne, I am only talking about the rear LCD setting, not the in camera JPG processing. This was to make the LCD screen look better with more saturated colors. It doesn't effect the histogram.

I have run into something I need help on, maybe it's a defective GF1. Today I tried using manual lenses, first a Leica with Novaflex adapter and then a Nikon with DMW-MA1 and Fotodiox adapters and the camera will not let me select MF with either so I can't get the enlarged image for manual focus. The menu is set to allow AF + MF and the MF Assist is on. It works when the Pana lens is on but not with any legacy lens. What may I be doing wrong?
 

Brian Mosley

New member
Hi John,

you're probably looking for a menu option to allow shooting with no lens fitted, or something like that - sorry, I don't have my G1 to hand to give you the exact menu text.

Also, from Andy Westlake over at dpreview - a disagreement with your LCD assessment :

"In my more cynical moments, I'd suggest that just sounds like someone who hasn't found all of the GF1's LCD controls yet. Remember Panasonic's bad habit of having effectively two separate brightness controls - one in the menu, and 'Power LCD' in the Quick Menu - means it's really easy to miss setting it up optimally (just as 99% of users won't even find, let alone attempt to set up, the LCD colour balance controls). "

So make sure you've enabled 'Power LCD' in the Quick Menu too!

Cheers

Brian
 

Cindy Flood

Super Moderator
Cindy and Dianne, I am only talking about the rear LCD setting, not the in camera JPG processing. This was to make the LCD screen look better with more saturated colors. It doesn't effect the histogram.

I have run into something I need help on, maybe it's a defective GF1. Today I tried using manual lenses, first a Leica with Novaflex adapter and then a Nikon with DMW-MA1 and Fotodiox adapters and the camera will not let me select MF with either so I can't get the enlarged image for manual focus. The menu is set to allow AF + MF and the MF Assist is on. It works when the Pana lens is on but not with any legacy lens. What may I be doing wrong?
Hmmm. I used mine quite a bit with the Pen-F adapter and my 60 f/1.5 Pen-F lens. I also used my Oly 50 f/2 on the 4/3 to M4/3 adapter and my Canon 50 f/1.2 ltm with a John Milich M4/3 to M adapter. I was able to get focus assist. I did have one problem. I got a message several times that my lens was not seated properly (with the Pen-F adapter). I'll get mine out and check it out again. I'll report back.
 
Top