woodyspedden
New member
Terry and jonoWoody,
Both cameras are using the same sensor. Panny uses a weaker AA filter that gives marginally more detail. But essentially shooting RAW there really isn't a demonstrable difference. As you said, shooting jpegs, the Oly wins.
Here is what I copied from the GF1 review (from a number of different pages):
As shown elsewhere in this review the color rendition and white balance on a bright sunny day suffers in comparison to the Olympus E-P1 (which has some of the best JPEGs on the market), and at a pixel level the JPEGs don't make the most of the sensor's capabilities, but for most users (without access to an E-P1 for comparison) I suspect the results - even at the default settings - will give little cause for complaint.
Focus and metering are very reliable (far more so than the E-P1), and since both lenses are excellent, overall impressions are very positive indeed - we took over 3500 shots during the production of this review, and the number of problems we had that could be laid fairly and squarely at the feet of the camera (as opposed to the operator) was tiny.
Switching to raw capture and processing in ACR lifts the GF1's output from the realms of the 'perfectly decent' to the top tier of consumer camera picture quality, particularly at lower ISO settings, and particularly when detail and texture are important. Taking the camera's JPEG engine out of the equation reveals the excellent pixel-level sharpness captured by the CMOS sensor, and allows you to get exactly the color rendition you want (if, like us, you don't find the GF1's default color mapping that appealing). Even a straight ACR or Lightroom conversion at default settings produces results that are on a significantly higher level than those produced in-camera from the same exposure.
Panasonic GF1 advantages over E-P1
Faster autofocus and AF subject tracking
Higher resolution screen (twice as many dots)
Built in flash
Optional Viewfinder
AVCHD Lite
Fast (F1.7) pancake lens kit
Olympus E-P1 advantages over GF1
Currently supports autofocus on a wider range of Olympus Four Thirds lenses
In-body IS
Collapsible kit zoom
Stereo Sound
Dual control dials
Art Filters
As we've seen with previous Panasonic models, switching to raw mode is like lifting a veil from the output, and even in this quick ACR conversion the true capabilities of the sensor are revealed, with visibly more resolution and none of the demosaicing artefacts or moiré we saw in the camera JPEG. By comparison the Olympus has improved far less, which - as we pointed out when we reviewed the E-P1 - is as much an indication of just how good its JPEGs are as anything else.
Given our experience with every other Olympus and Panasonic camera it comes as no surprise that this raw comparison reveals the GF1 to have a slight resolution advantage over the E-P1 (thanks, presumably, to a slightly lighter low pass filter) - in fact the amount of detail you can capture with this body / lens combination is simply stunning.
If you are a raw shooter there's no doubt that the GF1 can make more use of a good lens (removing the E-P1's superior processing equalizes just about everything else, and from a color and tonality point of view there's no significant difference).
Here is the link to the full review:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/PanasonicGF1/
I wasn't trying to "explain" why the jpeg from raw process with the GF1 "lifts a veil" compared to the EP-1. I was simply pointing out that this was a conclusion drawn in the review. If it is true then it is important (at least to me). If it is rubbish then I will stop reading DPReviews.
Sorry if I created confusion but I read what I read and Terry quoted the pieces of the article I was referring to. I have no personal experience with the GF1 and only had a brief period with the G1 so I will keep my nose out of this.
Woody