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!

Thom Hogan's GF1 review.

Brian Mosley

New member
Great promotion for m4/3rds imho - when such a highly respected Nikon technical author gives his attention to both offerings.

No sign of Nikon entering the fray - I'm guessing Sony will be the big one to watch.

Cheers

Brian
 

monza

Active member
Interesting read, and fair. He does refer to GF1 'menu madness' although that better describes the E-P1, IMHO. I find the Panasonic menus much easier to navigate, although certainly not perfect.
 

Rawfa

Active member
I think this guys is way over his head when it comes to noise. I mean " I'd limit my shooting to ISO 400 and lower my in-camera sharpening value"?!?! "you can get usable ISO 800 images out of the GF1, just like the E-P1"?!?!? I really don't know about the GF1, but the E-P1 can go pretty high when it comes to iso with VERY usable images. I have some samples at iso 4000 and iso 2000 here if someone wants some REAL perspective about the E-P1 with high iso.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
I think this guys is way over his head when it comes to noise. I mean " I'd limit my shooting to ISO 400 and lower my in-camera sharpening value"?!?! "you can get usable ISO 800 images out of the GF1, just like the E-P1"?!?!? I really don't know about the GF1, but the E-P1 can go pretty high when it comes to iso with VERY usable images. I have some samples at iso 4000 and iso 2000 here if someone wants some REAL perspective about the E-P1 with high iso.
On that point, Thom is right on the money!

ISO3200, even on the Nikon D300, is a big stretch when it comes to "usable" images.
 

pellicle

New member
Hi

his comment on battery life is a worry:

My maximum shots per charge was somewhere just below 300 (I was shooting only raw and using the LCD a bit more than usual), but my average was somewhere slightly below 200
my G1 is way over this
 

Rawfa

Active member
On that point, Thom is right on the money!

ISO3200, even on the Nikon D300, is a big stretch when it comes to "usable" images.
I really think that iso 800 is not on the money at all...unless you're planning to have your pictures published on a magazine or a giant outdoor.
 
D

deep.space

Guest
Hello! I am trying to find a m4/3 camera that will require the least modifications to mount a very fast Fujinon TV lens i bought. Since the back of the lens protrudes into the camera body, could somebody kindly measure the FLANGE to SHUTTER distance, possibly down to the 10th of millimeter? To be more specific: from the outer, surface metal rim to the closest point that will not block the shutter curtain of the GF1. Thanks Bart :)
 
V

Vivek

Guest
I really think that iso 800 is not on the money at all...unless you're planning to have your pictures published on a magazine or a giant outdoor.
Yup, "usable" image is a very subjective description.:)
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Hello! I am trying to find a m4/3 camera that will require the least modifications to mount a very fast Fujinon TV lens i bought. Since the back of the lens protrudes into the camera body, could somebody kindly measure the FLANGE to SHUTTER distance, possibly down to the 10th of millimeter? To be more specific: from the outer, surface metal rim to the closest point that will not block the shutter curtain of the GF1. Thanks Bart :)
Bart, Start a separate thread giving more details (focal length, any pics, etc).
Do not expect to get what you ask here as it is a very difficult task!
 

Rawfa

Active member
Yup, "usable" image is a very subjective description.:)
That’s what I was about to say and that’s why I don’t really think it’s fair to make such a strong statement as the one he makes on the review. And even if the concept of “usable” is subjective there’s a general base line consensus among certain communities…so again I must insist that this guy’s review sounds extremely oriented to a very specific target audience. I have read dozens of reviews and this is the first time I’ve read such a poor rating regarding high iso. But hey, my results and I can only speak for the E-P1. Taking in considaration that I tend to buy the GF1 I sure hope iso 400 and 800 are not the top line for “usable”.

P.S - I'm a member of a couple of massive Nikon and Canon forums and I know Canon and Nikon people can be very much the fanatic type...I'm not so sure about how bisased this guy really is.
 

Lars

Active member
P.S - I'm a member of a couple of massive Nikon and Canon forums and I know Canon and Nikon people can be very much the fanatic type...I'm not so sure about how bisased this guy really is.
Bias aside, Thom is used to the noise performance of D3/D700. If you view Thom's comments in that context then perhaps they make more sense.
 

Nick_Yoon

New member
Not very biased, if you read his comparison of the Panasonic LX3, Canon G10 and Nikon P6000. The Nikon is the only one he advised against buying.

"If you need pixels, you need the Canon, hands down. If you need the fast, wide, defect-free lens, you need the Panasonic. You don't need the Coolpix."

http://www.bythom.com/compactchallenge.htm
 
Last edited:

Rawfa

Active member
Bias aside, Thom is used to the noise performance of D3/D700. If you view Thom's comments in that context then perhaps they make more sense.
That does make sense...but only for people who know Thom, and I think an equipment review should not require that you actually know the reviewer.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
That does make sense...but only for people who know Thom, and I think an equipment review should not require that you actually know the reviewer.
Yes, he is a self proclaimed Nikon "follower" he is also a sooth sayer. Predicted that Olympus will be no more.

I like "Rockwell" better.;)
 

monza

Active member
I agree a separate thread is probably better; that said, there is a thread from December/January (or so) about M adapters for micro 4/3 and there were some measurements posted, the question was concerning the 21mm Super Angulon...don't forget the baffle around the shutter, that may be the limiting measurement...
 
Top