rrobinson54
New member
Other than video (which I never use), is the GH1 worth the extra cost vs. the G1? How much better is the GH1 (image quality, ergonomics, AF, viewfinder, build, etc.)?
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!
Is the GH1 better than the G1?
- Thread starter rrobinson54
- Start date
Paul_Kerfoot
Member
Hi rrobinson54
I have a G1. I believe the primary difference between it and the GH1 is a 14-140mm kit lens that is optimized for video. The 14-140mm is very quiet and, by itself, sells for a street price of ~$850. Other than that you will be hard pressed to tell which of the two took a still photo.
Paul
I have a G1. I believe the primary difference between it and the GH1 is a 14-140mm kit lens that is optimized for video. The 14-140mm is very quiet and, by itself, sells for a street price of ~$850. Other than that you will be hard pressed to tell which of the two took a still photo.
Paul
vincechu
New member
I agree with Paul - the G1 + GH1's image quality are extremely similar - and if you don't use video or need the 14-140mm lense then the G1's the better option - more value for money in my opinion.
GH1 with 14-140mm lens costs £1100 in UK
G1 with 14-45mm lens costs £449.99-500 in UK. But if you would want to buy the 14-140mm lense to go on a G1 it would cost you about £600-700 in the uk, total of around £1000-1100 so you might as well get the GH1 and hav video too in my opinion.
But for value for money and if u want to take photos mainly as u've said get the G1 with the 14-45mm lens for £449.99, and if u want extra zoom you could consider buying the 45-200mm lens for £200-£249 although this would mean u'd have to change lenses. Or better still buy the G1 twin lense kit ;-)
Vince
GH1 with 14-140mm lens costs £1100 in UK
G1 with 14-45mm lens costs £449.99-500 in UK. But if you would want to buy the 14-140mm lense to go on a G1 it would cost you about £600-700 in the uk, total of around £1000-1100 so you might as well get the GH1 and hav video too in my opinion.
But for value for money and if u want to take photos mainly as u've said get the G1 with the 14-45mm lens for £449.99, and if u want extra zoom you could consider buying the 45-200mm lens for £200-£249 although this would mean u'd have to change lenses. Or better still buy the G1 twin lense kit ;-)
Vince
Amin
Active member
I have both cameras, and they seem identical in ergnomics, AF, viewfinder, and build. Image quality seems very slightly better with the GH1, and I like the multi-aspect ratio (the G1 crops when shooting 3:2 or 16:9, whereas the GH1 does not), but the GH1 has a greater tendency to suffer banding, especially at high ISO. If video and the 14-140 lens aren't important to you, I think the G1 is a far better buy.
peterb
Member
If you get the GF1 and decide you'd like to have that optional EVF you might as well have gotten the G1 in the first place. Yes, a better machine. Plus with the 20mm f1.8 lens the G1 is a less obtrusive camera (than one with the 14-45mm zoom) but one with a great EVF and an articulating LCD.
photoSmart42
New member
I have both, and it seems to me like the GH1 is a better camera, especially with the 14-140 lens. It feels heavier, the focus is smoother, and personally it gives me a bit more confidence in taking pictures. I love the GH1 so far.
Price-wise, if you buy a bare G1 for $350 used, and the 14-140 lens for $800, you're right back into GH1 brand new territory, so I think the pricing on the GH1 is in a good place. You can also get a G1, then a 14-45 and a 45-200 again for about the price of a new GH1, and with the GH1 you get a single lens that can cover a wide range plus video and slightly higher resolution. To me it was simply about the math, and the GH1 came out ahead.
Price-wise, if you buy a bare G1 for $350 used, and the 14-140 lens for $800, you're right back into GH1 brand new territory, so I think the pricing on the GH1 is in a good place. You can also get a G1, then a 14-45 and a 45-200 again for about the price of a new GH1, and with the GH1 you get a single lens that can cover a wide range plus video and slightly higher resolution. To me it was simply about the math, and the GH1 came out ahead.
D
drxcm
Guest
I have the GH1 and find that the banding issue makes anything above iso 800 very difficult to work with, unless you err on the overexposure side. For low light work, the banding is a BIG problem.
slau
New member
I have both G1 and GH1. Since I prefer to have the option to take HD video, I tend to carry my GH1 80-90% of the time if I am taking only one M4/3 body. I only carry the G1 as either a back up or when I like to have two M4/3 bodies and two lenses set up when I am shooting.
Other than my personal preference, I would say the G1 & GH1 are practically the same machine. I agree that if you definitely don't need HD video and the 14-140 lens, you would not miss anything by buying the G1.
Other than my personal preference, I would say the G1 & GH1 are practically the same machine. I agree that if you definitely don't need HD video and the 14-140 lens, you would not miss anything by buying the G1.
apicius9
New member
Now that I am in the process of upgrading, you guys are coming up with the negatives
That's the first time I heard this. But for me the option of video and the different uncropped formats are worth the upgrade - of the body only, I can't see myself getting into video so much that it is worth the GH1 kit lens. And when I need more than iso 800 with the Angenieux 25/0.95, it's just too dark to shoot Stefan
M
meilicke
Guest
Oh sure, rub it in.And when I need more than iso 800 with the Angenieux 25/0.95, it's just too dark to shoot
Stefan
Banding with the GH1 has been discussed in depth on DP Review. I sold my GH1 recently for this very reason. Banding is a problem at all ISOs in underexposed/shaded areas. You need to really nail your exposure in order to minimise banding. There is also an anomaly with the noise reduction setting in the way it impacts RAW files. Normally, NR has no impact on RAW. With the GH1, however, if you set NR to the lowest setting, RAW files lose detail. If you set NR to the highest setting RAW files show increased detail. This causes a problem with movies since if you wish to retain the highest level of RAW detail for stills you need to set NR to the highest setting which softens detail in movie capture. In the end. I gave up trying to sort out this nonsense.
Now that I am in the process of upgrading, you guys are coming up with the negatives
Stefan
Amin
Active member
Can't say that I'm finding this problem very often and certainly very infrequently below ISO 800. I have seen it even at ISO 100, but very infrequently. When I do notice banding which is significant enough to bother me, I find that Nik Dfine is very effective at removing it.
I wasn't too happy when I found banding in some my photos on my gh1. I thought it was only a video issue. It is obvious when underexposed. I had always wondered if the G1 suffered the same problem. I'm not much of a pixel peeper and when I use my faster primes its either not so bad (you really really have to look for it) or not there at all.
It has taught me to become more pedantic now when it comes to getting correct exposure. I bought the GH1 mainly for video with the odd pics here and there so it suits me very well =).
You can buy just the body now from japan but it lacks english menu's.
It has taught me to become more pedantic now when it comes to getting correct exposure. I bought the GH1 mainly for video with the odd pics here and there so it suits me very well =).
You can buy just the body now from japan but it lacks english menu's.