Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 49 of 49

Thread: G1 Review on PopPhoto

  1. #1
    Senior Member barjohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Galveston, TX
    Posts
    947
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    171

    G1 Review on PopPhoto

    Anyone know what happened to their review? Since it was selected camera of the year the detailed review is gone and when you click on the link to more details you get the old September news release.

  2. #2
    Senior Member barjohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Galveston, TX
    Posts
    947
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    171

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    It was in the January issue so maybe that is why they took it down. In any case I collected a comparison set of data from PopPhoto to see how the G1 stacked up in their testing. I am including a snapshot of the spreadsheet. I hope it is readable. If anyone wants the XLS file let me know and I will post it as a ZIP. The G1 seems to compare pretty well through ISO 400 and doesn't seem too bad at 800. Based on my own testing so far, it seems to compare well to the M8 at 1250 and 2500 with an easier to look at noise, more film like and less blobby.
    Last edited by barjohn; 9th August 2009 at 22:10.

  3. #3
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,848
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    Thanks for the spreadsheet...this fits well with this post:

    http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4573

  4. #4
    Senior Member peterb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Tysons Corner, Virginia
    Posts
    490
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    18

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    Yes, that spreadsheet pretty much sums up what I did with my own little piece of cross referencing. Sean Reid on his good website (www.reidreviews.com) just tonight posted a very positive review of the Milich GT adapter which is apparently milled in fine brass to accommodate both M and screw mount Rangefinder lenses on the G1. The article points out what appears to have been a very much overlooked possibility of the 4/3rds and, more to the point, now, the micro 4/3rds (referred to as MFT by Reichman and Reid) and that is with the smaller lens mount due to no longer needing a mirror box a wealth of lenses become available at the outset via adapters like from Milich, Novoflex, Cameraquest and others. Something Panasonic (and I presume Olympus as well) must have known. And the trees are already beginning to bear fruit (just re-read some of the exciting posts here).

    It is astounding to me how, in so many of the reviews I'd read, while praising some of the G1's technical prowess (like Pop Photo's key tests of resolution, color accuracy, low ISO noise etc.) some have warned against buying this camera until MORE lenses are made available. The kit lens, as many on this forum (myself included) have observed is simply amazing for a 'kit' lens. Reichman in Luminous Landscape was blown away by it's sharpness and contrast (aside from its ability to win him over for simply being more preferable to tote around over a boulder-like highly obtrusive DSLR and its behemouth glass. And Panasonic has promised (which I'd no doubt) other lenses to come, which with Leitz as a mentor and partner, even if designed on their own by Panasonic, would be worthy pieces of optical engineering as the kit lens has already demonstrated.

    But, aside from the kit lens, which in an of itself is a fine place keeper until more MFT lenses are made available by Panasonic, Olympus and Sigma (to name three but I"m wondering if Leitz, CV and Zeiss will get into the fray here) the amazing thing is that Panasonic through a 4/3's adapter of their own make immediately made available (albeit with manual focusing) the entire arsenal of superbly gushed over Zuiko lenses some of which are stellar light giants of a solid f2.0 over their entire zoom range (and with, not surprisingly, equally jaw dropping price tags to match). And within months (the camera was announced in September and came to market in November) a number of players announced M, Nikon and adapters for other mounts.

    What other new camera system has so quickly garnered such interest among so many adapter makers in so short a time?

    Yet the many of the reviews sniffed about the 'dearth' of lenses. Hardly.

    Finally, one more thing to add. Many of the reviews, again albeit positive for the most part, also complained about the introductory price of $800 (okay $799 but we're splitting hairs here) as being too high. When a 'comparable' DSLR' could be had for the same price (albeit bigger and bulkier). Their point being marques like Canon and Nikon et al had a slew of lenses available.

    To a point they're right. But considering what's unfolding so quickly as Reid (and myself included) have pointed out, the G1 may turn out to be the photographic bargain of the new century. A $800 body of robust design and skillful image making which promises to be able to use lenses going back to the 1930's with no problem. And a superb focusing system using a very fine EFT and focusing patch that makes fine focus with these optical gems very possible, particularly in low light work wide open, which I'm sure most will employ anyways since that's what we want these optics of Leitz, Zeiss and others for anyway (and together with the low noise and high resolution at ISO 100-400 makes for a deadly combination).

    And how many modern digital cameras at any price can claim that.

    Peter
    Last edited by peterb; 24th December 2008 at 19:00.
    Life is an infinite series of moments called..."now".
    My job is to capture them.

  5. #5
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,848
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    Peter, first, great Christmas card photo.

    You mention some excellent points about the G1. It is the most capable camera by far when it comes to lens variety. And this flexibility makes it very complementary to one's existing systems.

    In my case, it can use all my Nikkor DSLR lenses. A nice small second body. Perfect if I don't need the low light or high speed capabilities of the D700 (or if just I don't want to lug it around.) Yes, a D40 would serve the same purpose but with an inferior viewfinder and missing all the other G1 features. And it won't meter with older Nikkor lenses, whereas the G1 will!

    Everyone is focusing on M lenses, but it even works with my vintage Nikon SP lenses. (My former M8 could do that too, but I wasn't able to focus the M8 accurately, even with a magnifier. No such issue on the G1. )

    And here is something no other camera can do: because of TTL focus, it essentially eliminates the inherent focusing error between vintage Nikon RF and Contax RF lenses. I'll be using a vintage Sonnar 50/1.5 alongside my Nikkor RF lenses.

    Bonus: what Sonnar focus shift?

    It also opens up some nice possibilities if you like to experiment. I also picked up three mint lenses for less than $50: a Rokkor-X 45/2, along with a Carl Zeiss Jena 50/2.8 Tessar, and a Hexanon 40/1.8.

    Last but not least, R glass can be a lot cheaper than M glass. Yes, they aren't tiny like M lenses, but where can you buy a mint 50/2 Summicron in M mount for $150? I plan on converting this lens to Nikon F mount so it will work on the D700 as well as the G1 (http://www.leitax.com/leica-lens-for-nikon-cameras.html) Try that with a Summicron-M!

    What's next for M4/3 cameras? This is just the beginning.
    Last edited by monza; 24th December 2008 at 22:08.

  6. #6
    marknorton
    Guest

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    I think Panasonic must be pleased the camera has been so well received especially by those who can think out of the box. The camera resists instant classification and if the price is a challenge, that's part down to the Yen, part down to the quality of the camera. How many other cameras have ASPH kit lenses?

    For me, the key is the ability to sense actual focus, what you see is truly what you get. It really makes the Leica rangefinder system seem hopelessly out of date. As monza says, focus shift, what focus shift? Front focussing, back focussing, misalignment, all consigned to history with this camera, providing the lens can get to infinity.

    I know Jono thinks it's noisy but to my ears, it's like my Leica M6, none of the M8 metallic intrusion. Leica have really missed a trick not getting involved with MFT.

  7. #7
    Senior Member peterb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Tysons Corner, Virginia
    Posts
    490
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    18

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    Monza, thank you for the compliment. To your point, as an adjunct to one's existing glass collection, the G1 after just ONE month out in the marketplace appears to be without peer in that regard! And the experimental possibilities are great! And not just from Leitz, Zeiss or CV but many, many others. I hadn't even considered R glass because it's an adapter to an adapter but, sure why not? And I didn't realize used R prices were that reasonable. Amazing eh? So have fun! I look forward to seeing what you (and others experimenting with their own collections) see on the electronic pages here.

    To paraphrase a famous non-physician writer of children's books, Dr. Seuss...

    "Oh the place you'll go.
    You'll be seeing great sights!
    You'll join some high fliers
    who soar to high heights.

    You won't lag behind, because you'll have the speed (could Seuss have owned a Noctilux?)
    You'll pass the whole gang and you'll take the lead
    Wherever you'll fly, you'll be the best of the best.
    Wherever you go, you will top all the rest"



    Mark and Monza, an EXCELLENT point about the fact that with true TTL focusing via the superb EVF the issue of focus shift vanishes (also a point that Reid, et. al. have brought up from time to time). The ultimate photographic WYSIWYG.

    And, Mark, you may be right. Leitz, while a supporter of the 4/3's mount may have missed an opportunity here. But did they? Maybe they were curious to see what might transpire after Panasonic released the first volley (they, too, must have realized the possibilities when coming up with 4/3s system and the possibilty of a mirror-box-less camera they had to have supported before embarking on their own versions to entice future minions to their fold). The M8 may ultimately become a full frame to grow into when one has sufficent box tops to afford one while an MFT of their own design, either full rangefinder or, even more likely, a new EVF'ed D3 variant (like Olympus may be trying to develop with their hints of a digital Pen they hinted at at Photokina this fall) could serve to bring new players in for them.

    Finally, your thoughts about Panasonic's opening volley of the camera's initial price as being possibly related to the Yen made me also wonder (as an advertising man myself), considering, as you pointed out, that the kit lens has aspherical elements to it unlike others, how much may be in the sheer marketing of creating a bit of a loss leader to attract existing players already entrenched in their existing systems to a totally new niche? But then again, cautious players that they are, Leitz may again be asleep at the switch, however, their well-seeded audience may come to the rescue if and once they do come around.

    Happy Holidays all.

    Peter
    Last edited by peterb; 25th December 2008 at 05:45.
    Life is an infinite series of moments called..."now".
    My job is to capture them.

  8. #8
    Senior Member barjohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Galveston, TX
    Posts
    947
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    171

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    Peter,
    Leica has missed the boat plain and simple. You can't be a market leader unless you lead rather than follow.

    Let's assume Leica sees the light and comes out with their own camera. Other than the red badge what can they offer? They will balk at the idea that you can use other glass than Leica's and try and cripple it in some way to prevent that as they did with the M8 by not allowing other lenses in the menu system. Will they be able to improve on the electronics over what Panasonic can do? I don't think so. They will move to make it more proprietary in every way they can so they can price it at 2 to 3 times the Panasonic price. While I might prefer a camera that looked like a CL and about the size of the CL there is a limit to what I will pay for the privilege. To really be competitive they would need to add an optical RF with electronic framing and electronic focus assist. Unless they have already started developing such a VF they are years away.

  9. #9
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,848
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    What we have here is a company who is entrenched in history, and concerns itself with modernizing its offerings with a clear link to that heritage. (I will cite the M8 baseplate as but one example.) Taking a step forward but keeping one foot in the past.

    In some sense they can't be completely blamed; how many avowed Leicaphiles would cry 'heresy!' if Leica had come out with a G1-style product and called it the M8?

    Compare that to Panasonic who never (to my knowledge) made a film camera. They've been around a long time in consumer electronics, for sure, but they have no ties to the past photographically, so they can design unhindered.

    It will be very interesting to see where the technology path leads in the next few years. Personally I think Leica should focus on glass, and let someone else manufacture the light-tight box. Yes, it will have a red dot and cost more, but it should also have higher build quality.

    The line is already blurring between video cameras and still cameras. The Casio offering will record 60fps bursts, and is actually recording into the buffer constantly even before the shutter button is pressed. No more motors, no prisms, no mirrors. Soon, contrast autofocus will outperform phase detect. 4/3 sensor technology will eventually rival today's full frame. So, smaller camera, smaller lenses, less lens mass for faster focus. This is a never ending product development treadmill that only the biggest companies can run on.

  10. #10
    Senior Member barjohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Galveston, TX
    Posts
    947
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    171

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    I can't say I disagree with you. If they focused on just making lenses they could make a variety of lenses, not just M lenses but new 4/3 and micro 4/3rds lenses. However, their manufacturing has got to be able to produce the lenses at a price that will sell in the respective market. The 4/3rd or micro 4/3rds market is not likely to want to pay $3K+ for a lens. This means shifting to high grade plastics combined with metal. The build quality of the Panasonic lenses appears to be very good. leica should be able to make a slightly better quality and charge a premium. For example if the Panasonic lens sells for $350 and the Sigma lens sells for $275, the Leica equivalent should be priced around $550-$600. They need to leave electronics and software to a company with better capability. Since I manage software development and used to program myself some time back, I can tell you that Leica's software development ability is abysmal and sloooow to produce.
    V/r John

  11. #11
    Senior Member peterb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Tysons Corner, Virginia
    Posts
    490
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    18

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    There is no doubt that when it comes to forward thinking Leica is about as adventurous as some residents in nursing homes (although I have to admit the S2 is certainly a bold move on their part) but I see several possibilities here.

    (1) Leica could do nothing. (Which is most likely to the case.) And continue plodding along with the M8.4 (a fully weather sealed M8) or M9 (which would be a FULL frame rangefinder to take full advantage of the M lenses). Possibly developing a full frame R to take advantage of those R lenses already in production (and which would still not compete with the S2 crowd whom they see are those fanatics who want totally unsurpassed no-holds barred digital imaging) and shore up those who'd made commitments to the R system. This is a most likely case scenario for me.

    (2) They could develop more 4/3's lenses (like the 25mm f1.4 or the 14-50 zoom). But I suspect the time and effort to pursue that when the excitment is not in regular 4/3's but the 'micro' 4/3's would be a losing proposition for them particularly when Olympus' Zuiko lenses with their superb optics are available (at equally Leitz like stratospheric prices) as well as equally high quality Zuiko lenses that are a notch or two below Oly's best (at prices that are more reasonable so both bases are covered). And again when adapters abound for both M and R lenses it may be also be not worth Leitz' time and effort.

    (3) They could convert their existing M lenses with micro 4/3's mounts and flanges. Again I would say why bother? When as Monza and others have pointed out there's a bevvy of adapters on the way that will easily accommodate their existing optics with no additional effort on Leitz' part.

    (4) They could develop a MFT camera of their own that readily accepts current M lenses (like the CL they created jointly with Minolta years ago) MIT out der adapters. Based on how they've been jazzing up their D-Lux 4 with goodies like a grip and fancy cases and, now, a body in titanium, that Panasonic didn't do with their LX-3 and Leitz didn't do with any of their prior versions of the LX series, I suspect Leica may be primed for such a move. Long term, they would produce a camera either with a mechanical rangefinder (not likely and too engineering intensive that is not necessary) or an EVF (more likely) in a somewhat less expensive (by Leitz standards anyway) svelte M8- or CL-ish (more likely) looking body that need not resemble the profile of an SLR as Panasonic cautiously did initially because focus groups told them the public may not be ready right away for a non-traditional non-SLR looking camera (which seemed, I noted, to be a disappointment to several reviewers who would have preferred the initial foray into MFT with a more adventurous body that could really take advantage inessential need for a mirror box).

    This way Leitz could have a good introductory body of their own industrial design (like they did with the DL 4) that accepted M lenses (I would think they might push their more modestly priced Summarit line) with no adapter necessary and introduce a whole new flock of users to their fold.

    But again, as BarJohn has suggested, if past performance is any indication of future predictability, that course of action is simply not in Leica's DNA.

    But who saw the S2 coming?

    Just my 2 centavos.

    Peter
    Last edited by peterb; 25th December 2008 at 16:20.
    Life is an infinite series of moments called..."now".
    My job is to capture them.

  12. #12
    Senior Member barjohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Galveston, TX
    Posts
    947
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    171

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    Peter,
    I'm sure they saw the S2 is the easiest path to innovation. In electronics you pay a premium for smaller sizes. Look at the Apple Air, Sony Viao's small units, etc. It just costs more to make it compact and smaller. You need many layer circuit boards and those are expensive and more custom ICs and they are expensive. On the other hand with a larger unit you can use off the shelf components since space is not such a premium. The tighter the density the greater the issues with resolving heat problems too. The M8 doesn't use custom chips and I suspect that the S2 won't either. On the other hand, I suspect the G1 is full of custom ASICs. The problem with off the shelf chip sets is you have to make a lot of compromises that you could avoid with your own custom chips.
    V/r John

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Tokyo, Japan
    Posts
    280
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    34

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    I would of liked to see Leitz jump into m4/3s too. Although, one change from 4/3s to m4/3s is that the company has to commit to releasing a product before they can join. Announcing that they are in the m4/3s group would be the same as announcing a product (not sure if it has to be a camera, or just lenses). Maybe why the Leica name isn't on the G1 lenses?

    Looking at Panasonic's 4/3s products you can see pretty clearly they were preparing for m4/3s. All their lenses support contrast focusing. In lens IS seems better suited for video then in body IS. (I think?) Leitz probably knew this from the beginning too, so I'm curious what they got out of it. They already have M, S, R, compact, maybe 4/3s and m4/3s would be yet another standard for them.

    I'm watching m4/3s with quite a bit of excitement. It's the system I wanted when I bought my E-510 and it's really thrown a wrench in my upgrade plans.
    Charles - flickr

  14. #14
    Senior Member peterb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Tysons Corner, Virginia
    Posts
    490
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    18

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    John,

    Excellent point. And your Apple/Vaio analogy is spot on. IBM, if you recall at the time Apple rolled out their Apple IIe was so spooked that they sent a team of engineers to come up with their own unit using off-the-shelf parts. The result, of course, was the PC which was the beginning of IBM's slow demise from industry leadership. (Talk about underestimating a market!)

    For Leitz, the S2 may be 1913 (or whenever Oskar Barnack fiddled with movie film) all over again and gives Leica a chance to carve out something fresh (or at least the perception of that anyway). Something they haven't done in a long time.

    It's ironic that the 4/3's system which Leitz were involved in is something they haven't (at least by their latest offerings anyways) embraced except for two lenses they provided for Panasonic's SLR (as well as Panasonic's L1 as well as Leitz' own D3) as part of their agreement no doubt (but have apparently decided to back off from developing any further offerings).

    Leitz' loyal core wanted to see a digital M and they delivered. Flawed with IR issues due to it's thin anti-aliasing filters that left Leitz having to issue IR filters for all their lenses, thus diminishing the full potential of their renowned optics they didn't have to compromise in film in order to compensate for the imaging anomalies. The R has yet to be addressed.

    It almost appears that the S2 was an effort to remind everyone they still have something. (And they may very well.) How many need such resolution? From what I've seen from the images produced by scores of digital cameras, it may not be many. But, nonetheless, the line has been drawn in the sand and Leitz is making a bold move. How successful, remains to be seen. But I'm sure there's going to be some considerable nail biting in Solms at the prospect of new folks in these hard economic times globally at having to shell out thousands for a new system. Hasselblad and other medium format legends have been already feeling a pinch from the stepped up competition from below ( i.e. Nikon and Canon) with their increasingly improving image making devices (although in some circles I'm sure there will always be a place for medium format just as large format will never completely fall out of favor save for a few artists keeping it alive).

    Yeah, they used OTS parts to keep things simpler on the S2 and the M8. A built-in base of loyal users (for the M anyway) and no real competition (or interest) from other marques (although Nikon has been reported to be working on some new larger format sensor camera) are keeping them alive. History will once again determine whether for Leitz it was a bold move or a foolhardy one.

    Peter
    Last edited by peterb; 25th December 2008 at 18:28.
    Life is an infinite series of moments called..."now".
    My job is to capture them.

  15. #15
    Senior Member peterb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Tysons Corner, Virginia
    Posts
    490
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    18

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    Although...after some further thought, using a wholly new sensor of the likes no one else has used before for the S2 could be akin to Oskar Barnack playing with 35mm film and coming up with the Ur-Leica. That large chip had to require some substantial software and other stuff to manage it and while there may be some OTS components lurking somewhere in the body (like the color LCD that may have come from an old discontinued Nokia or Motorola cell phone) the lenses aren't, the body isn't (the M8 I agree was a digital retrofit but I'm not sure the same is true of the S2, given what I've read). It's a whole new ballgame. So again, history will determine its success or not.

    My guess is, again, it'll be nail biting time in Solms. While the S2 appears to definitely be a superior camera in terms of size and image potential (the combination of a larger sensor along with new modern, AF Leitz optics (AF which by the way Leitz was admittedly a latecomer to develop) all encased in a body a little SMALLER than the flagships of Nikon or Canon) Leitz has decided to take on, in these very unusually challenging economic times the base of such medium format stalwarts of Hasselblad, Rollei, Mamiya and Bronica.

    Like Betamax, the product may be technologically vastly superior but the established base among these players who may have made such an enormous commitment in terms of equipment and optics and money may be so substantial (as I suspect) that it could be quite daunting for Leitz (or anyone) to make any headway with an entirely new format in this arena at this time.

    Peter
    Last edited by peterb; 25th December 2008 at 19:33.
    Life is an infinite series of moments called..."now".
    My job is to capture them.

  16. #16
    Senior Member barjohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Galveston, TX
    Posts
    947
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    171

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    I worked for Control Data during the heyday of main frame computers. We had the number crunching market and IBM had the business processing market. Both companies resisted the move to new technologies. In the case of Control Data we had the leading capability to design custom large scale integrated circuits using CMOS and other technologies. We had actually built Cray class machines in the lab on LSI circuitry but marketing stood in the way. How could they charge hundreds of thousands of dollars for some little dinky machine when their current offering filled a room. They saw it as a threat to their revenue stream since most of the machines were sold on leases.

    Leica is stuck in the past for other reasons but the result is the same. Today, CDC, a company with 75,000 employees world wide is gone. It had the leading technology in hard drives and CPUs and threw it away. I can't tell you the number of arguments I had with senior managers about the need to change with the technology and learn to change the marketing to adapt to the way new technology would require. Anyway, that is ancient history.

    Leica seems to be falling into its past trap of going for glitz over substance. Titanium special editions, fancy colored covering, changing the logo from red to black, etc. It becomes the rich man's status symbol as opposed to a usable camera. The G1 just seems to do a good job at what it does and is priced fairly for what it offers.

    With the M8.2 Leica should have found a solution to the need for external IR filters. They didn't. It took them two years to come up with a sapphire crystal cover for the LCD, two new metal masks for the viewfinder, a slower shutter and minor changes to the software. Not very impressive to me. The firmware still has bugs, the electronics still show problems and they didn't bother to enhance the sensor. For these minor improvements they have the chutzpah to charge $2,800 or 2,000 Euros?
    V/r John

  17. #17
    Senior Member peterb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Tysons Corner, Virginia
    Posts
    490
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    18

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    Wow CDC. Boy, does that bring back memories. I was an undergrad at UVA and was interested in computers and recalled many a session in the basement of the biology building where the CDC was housed, typing out punch cards in Fortran. (And I recall the CDC being touted as the preferred mainframe of choice for the Astronomers and physicists who needed that number-crunching power.)

    CDC, a noble brontosaurus. Gone. And, you're right. Leitz has clung to the past marketing ploys of exotic reptilian coverings for special Pasha editions of the M's. And with the D-Lux 4 it may be more of the same (although part of me thinks Leitz may feel this latest iteration of their small sensor camera may finally be hitting its stride which is why they were so emboldened to do some of their old Leitz-y things to it like supply it with different skins and fancy leather bags like they used to do with their M film cameras).

    And, with the M8.2 not only should Leitz have addressed the IR issues, they should also have announced a camera that was weather sealed. To spend 4 kilobucks on a camera that could evaporate under the first drizzle is, in my opinion (along with others more knowledgeable with the innards and daily workings with the M8 like Sean Reid for example have expressed similar sentiments), totally inexcusable.

    All the more reason an $800 gem like the G1 is soooooooooo amazing. And so utterly reasonable.

    Peter
    Life is an infinite series of moments called..."now".
    My job is to capture them.

  18. #18
    Senior Member barjohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Galveston, TX
    Posts
    947
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    171

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    Maybe they will surprise us and wake up before it is too late. Somehow, I doubt it.
    V/r John

  19. #19
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    iiiNelson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    3,187
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    My theory or at least what I think would make the most sense for Leica to get into the mFT fold would be to make the future "D-Lux 5" or "Digilux 4" a mFT camera. No need for Leica to really have two overpriced point and shoots competing with each other IMO. They already gave us a strong shock value of the newly "upmarket PanaLeica cameras." They might as well add an extra $100 over current D-Lux4 prices for a G1 body made of magnesium or anodized aluminum with a red or black dot on it. I agree that they could fill the "upmarket lenses" that the Lumix brand doesn't have yet in the same and different focal lengths.
    Sony Visible Light & IR Photographer
    http://www.iiinelsonimages.com

  20. #20
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Manchester/Jerusalem
    Posts
    2,652
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    290

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    What I think a lot of people are missing is that Panasonic have made and are marketing this camera as the kind of first time SLR buyer who used to buy a Canon Rebel. Soccer Moms. I doubt they could care less about a thousand or so sold during its lifespan to be used with legacy lenses, that's not where the money is. As such the G1 being dinged for lack of lenses makes a lot more sense, the review is relative to the cameras intended market not a very specialist genre.
    I am not a painter, nor an artist. Therefore I can see straight, and that may be my undoing. - Alfred Stieglitz

    Website: http://www.timelessjewishart.com

  21. #21
    Senior Member Brian Mosley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,394
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    17

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    Ben, I think you're missing the value of pleasing the minority of legacy lens users.

    I think there's a high proportion of us on the forums, waxing lyrical about the G1... which probably has quite a knock on effect in favour of the G1 generally.

    The G1 is cool... buy one now! lol (coming from a happy Hexanon lens owner - now able to focus reliably for the first time with a digital camera)

    Kind Regards

    Brian

  22. #22
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Manchester/Jerusalem
    Posts
    2,652
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    290

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    I'm not knocking it Brian, not at all, just saying that perhaps mass read reviews and panasonics marketing departement are not specifically geared to a niche use. For someone to ridicule a review for saying that there are few lenses just because of the ability to use manual focus lenses with a seperately bought adaptor is to me a bit skewed relative to the 99% of people buying the camera.
    I am not a painter, nor an artist. Therefore I can see straight, and that may be my undoing. - Alfred Stieglitz

    Website: http://www.timelessjewishart.com

  23. #23
    Senior Member barjohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Galveston, TX
    Posts
    947
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    171

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    Ben,
    Folks like us that are enthusiasts because we have discovered a new creative tool have a disproportionate influence on many buyers beyond our own numbers. Any one looking on the Internet for information on the camera will be led to sights like this one and DPR which will influence them one way or the other.
    V/r John

  24. #24
    Bhakti-rider
    Guest

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    I was influenced to order a G1 by web reviews and sample images; this site figured prominently in that. I've never had a German lens in my life, and I don't anticipate buying any. I do look forward though to something faster than the two Panasonic lenses. My use for the G1 will be for occasions when photography isn't the only or main reason for being somewhere; most importantly riding motorcycles. For occasions when photography is the primary reason, well, I've got a 40D and some superb lenses, and might even get a 1D3 (or its successor for the LCD) one day.

    I worked for CDC for nine years (as a programmer/analyst), and I've seen few organizations that were so poorly run - one is NASA.

    I really want to thank all the knowledgeable people who devote time to provide help and encouragement to others on this forum. I haven't spent any significant time on DPReview, so I can't relate to the negative connotations I see about it on FM, but FM itself has its own crew of obnoxiously arrogant people who go into attack mode at the drop of a hat, and I haven't seen that here in the relatively short time since I learned of this site (by a post on FM).

  25. #25
    Senior Member peterb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Tysons Corner, Virginia
    Posts
    490
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    18

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    Ben,

    I think you're right in that what Panasonic may have been thinking in terms of marketing this camera is one thing. In fact, I saw a German microsite for the G1 that is (A) VERY cool. And, to your point I think, (B) VERY feminine as evidenced by this microsite they put up: http://www.panasonic.eu/lumixg/de-de/

    The thing that's neat about technology is that once it's put in human hands, anything can happen.

    The thing is, most of the time, a new gadget is used in exactly the way it was intended. And, thus, nothing changes. This typically occurs when the change is more evolutionary than revolutionary.

    But every once in a while, something else happens. And a piece of technology is offered that is perused, picked on, taken apart and analyzed. And people for whom it was not intended see all kinds of possibilities the inventors may not have intended. And suddenly there's excitement that's beyond what was expected. It happened with the Internet as a means of exchanging ideas among academics and government agencies. And, while not nearly on the scale of the Internet, such may be the case, I think, now with the G1.

    What started out as a means of bridging the point-and-shoot universe with the traditional SLR universe may have torn the fabric a little (boy I'm gettin' into it deep here) and opened up an entirely new universe altogether.

    Why else would companies suddenly race to develop lens adapters for this thing? Why else would we see so much buzz on these forums about its image-making ability.

    Because the excitement has taken hold.

    So what started out as a semi-serious toy (albeit and expensive one) that came in three colors may have the makings of serious picture making machine that can hold its own with the big boys.

    Just some thoughts.

    Peter
    Life is an infinite series of moments called..."now".
    My job is to capture them.

  26. #26
    Senior Member barjohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Galveston, TX
    Posts
    947
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    171

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    Peter,

    I think you are right on. It is sure causing some consternation on the LUF forum in the comparison thread with the M8. The reality that few there might want to face is that if an image from each using the same lens but cropped to the same image dimensions and tweaked to its optimum with the EXIF data removed they would be hard pressed to say which camera made which one. I have both M8 images and G1 images and if I tweak the colors so they are close it would be hard to tell.
    V/r John

  27. #27
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    iiiNelson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    3,187
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    Quote Originally Posted by barjohn View Post
    Peter,

    I think you are right on. It is sure causing some consternation on the LUF forum in the comparison thread with the M8. The reality that few there might want to face is that if an image from each using the same lens but cropped to the same image dimensions and tweaked to its optimum with the EXIF data removed they would be hard pressed to say which camera made which one. I have both M8 images and G1 images and if I tweak the colors so they are close it would be hard to tell.
    I agree and it speaks well of the G1 that it's even being compared to equipment roughly 10x the cost (with a lens included.)

    I still think the M8 outperforms the G1 overall but it's supposed to. The think a lot of people over at LUF have an elitist attitude towards anything without a red dot. I once suggest before Photokina (and afterwards) that Leica should introduce a real enthusiast product in the $800-2000 range as a stop gap between the D-Lux 3 and the M8. I thought the market could really bear something that was different and smaller than what Canon and Nikon offers in dSLR's. Quite a few people had the attitude that it would be complete trash for anything less than $3000... Go figure than the G1 at about $700 ($800 when introduced) is getting everyone excited for an everyday enthusiast product. What did I know?
    Sony Visible Light & IR Photographer
    http://www.iiinelsonimages.com

  28. #28
    kiloran
    Guest

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    Quote Originally Posted by peterb View Post
    Ben,

    I think you're right in that what Panasonic may have been thinking in terms of marketing this camera is one thing. In fact, I saw a German microsite for the G1 that is (A) VERY cool. And, to your point I think, (B) VERY feminine as evidenced by this microsite they put up: http://www.panasonic.eu/lumixg/de-de/
    Agree - first thing my partner said when she picked the camera up was that she liked how it felt, followed by how small it was, and then how easy it was to see through the viewfinder. Once I told her it was also available in red and blue that was it

    Female-friendly cameras: have to be the ultimate for any attached gearhead

  29. #29
    Senior Member peterb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Tysons Corner, Virginia
    Posts
    490
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    18

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    The other thing about this age of technology is that as it marches on price loses its meaning. How long can a $5500 camera (like the M8) remain worth $5500 when a camera like the G1 comes along and shows not only that someone else can use its optics (without the need of a filter to compensate for some anomalies) but the images are on a par with it.

    The M8 held the market on svelte until the G1 suddenly appeared. Now it's uniqueness is starting to look less unique. (And it's only a matter of time before someone resolves the rangefinder vs EVF vs some hybrid of both issue.)

    This happens not only between companies but more commonly within companies. Look at the Nikon's D700 vs their D3 and now the Canon 5DmkII vs the D1swhatever.

    Netscape was bested by Explorer which was bested by Firefox. The computer I'm writing this missive on is a dual-core Intel powerhouse with 130GB of internal storage that I purchased a year ago for $450. A computer that surely would have commanded $4000 had someone even attempted making one a scant three years ago.

    Crazy no?

    Peter
    Life is an infinite series of moments called..."now".
    My job is to capture them.

  30. #30
    Senior Member barjohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Galveston, TX
    Posts
    947
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    171

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    The other big area that Leica is rapidly missing the boat on is lenses. Yes, it is nice to build lenses the way they always have using brass, aluminum & titanium; however, other vendors have shown that modern plastics can be used in the construction of lens barrels that last for many years, reduce manufacturing costs, are lighter and allow for lower priced mass production. Many of these lenses have excellent optics, ED glass, aspherical elements and sell for a fraction of Leica prices. More importantly, they are getting better, meaning that the day will come when the difference will be so small that Leica will no longer be competitive in this market either. They really need to learn to think out of the past box. Making slower lenses to sell for less rather than reducing costs across the product line is not the solution. Look at the Oly 25/2.8 for $229, very high quality optics at an affordable price and relatively fast. If the coming 20/1.7 is anywhere near that price they won't be able to make them fast enough.

    Leica needs to learn to leverage off of their strength in lens optical design and now learn how to make it for a lower cost. There is no reason that with manufacturing automation they can't be competitive with Japanese manufacturers. They never will be as long as their mindset doesn't change. If they went into the M43 lens business, they could command a premium over Oly or Panasonic and have a mass market product. Even CV and Ziess have been slow to recognize the opportunity but they are catching on faster than Leica.
    V/r John

  31. #31
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    iiiNelson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    3,187
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    Agreed. While CV lenses aren't quite as nice as M lenses some of them do offer similar optical quality for a very small fraction of the price M lenses command. I know many Leicaphiles shun the notion but the proof is in many of the results I've seen on LUF and RFF.

    After I get my G1 I may look into the CV lenses with an adapter to fill the prime lens gaps not being offered by m4/3 should I feel the urge to add certain focal lecal lengths.
    Sony Visible Light & IR Photographer
    http://www.iiinelsonimages.com

  32. #32
    Senior Member peterb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Tysons Corner, Virginia
    Posts
    490
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    18

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    Quote Originally Posted by barjohn View Post
    Peter,

    It is sure causing some consternation on the LUF forum in the comparison thread with the M8. The reality that few there might want to face is that if an image from each using the same lens but cropped to the same image dimensions and tweaked to its optimum with the EXIF data removed they would be hard pressed to say which camera made which one. I have both M8 images and G1 images and if I tweak the colors so they are close it would be hard to tell.
    John,

    I've been reading a lot of those threads and some of those folks are out-and-out apoplectic at the idea of an interloper like the G1 horning in on their turf! In fact, I'd go so far to say that some of them may be on the verge of having a stroke!

    The interesting thing is, people for the most part buy Leica bodies for privilege of using their lenses on them. Yeah you can get Cosina and Zeiss (which some have argued have certain optics that are far superior to the Leitz at some focal lengths at a fraction of the costs), but the vast majority buy Leica bodies for the optics.

    At the dawn (or, rather late morning) of the digital age Leitz insisted that a digital rangefinder was not possible with their optics. Then Epson's CEO who had a fondness for rangefinders charged his troops to come out with a respectable camera that would utilize Leitz legendary optics and Leitz had to re-think their position. The result was the M8, a digital version of the illustrious line of film cameras that had preceded it.

    Leitz of course not wanting to compromise their vaunted optics opted not to have anything stand between their lenses and their sensors. That position resulted in Leitz having to issue IR filters for all their optics for use on their DRF that resulted in defeating their initial purpose in the first place. Costs for the privilege of using M lenses in the digital age went up even further.

    The problem with the appearance of the G1 on the horizon suggests there's an alternative (almost the same way Epson's line in the sand changed Leitz hardened positions). And that's changed the whole paradigm. Some like Sean Reid have argued that an EVF no matter how pristine is ultimately flawed. And that the rangefinder incorporated in the M8 gives it a distinct advantage over other viewing systems. On face value, I whole heartedly agree. But is that difference worth the extra 4.8 kilobucks to get that? For a machined body that is no where near as secure from the elements as the G1? WIth a sensor and firmware that are only as good as the moment they appear on the scene but constantly live in fear of betterment through advances in technology and software? When you factor all that into the equation then I'm not sure.

    As far as lens construction and cutting costs go, you may have a point. Today's plastics are certainly far better than the plastics of yore. I think Leitz has always maintained a position that materials should be chosen ONLY where they offer a clear superiority over others. That said, I seem to recall Leitz arguing that metals seem to hold their glass better in mounts than plastic ones do. And that plastics are better as aperture rings and lens hoods. And that metals (like brass and aluminum) are chosen for how well their heating coefficients of expansion are. Leitz trying to make sure their lenses can be used in ANY environment (which curiously cannot be said of the M8!) have chosen to make their lens construction of materials that would perform as intended whether in the Arctic or the Brazillian Rain forest or the arid wasteland of Afghanistan.

    That would explain why so many like Sean Reid are excited that the G1 may be offering an alternative body that can utilize Leitz ptics dating back to the 30's. That speaks well of Leitz' dogmatic, no-holds-barred approach to lens construction. An approach that has served them well. (So well, in fact, that as a result of their over built approach to lens construction, Leitz has been forced to continually up the performance of their lenses otherwise no one would buy anything new from them when there were so many good optics in the global inventory!)

    Should Leitz offer lenses constructed using the similar approaches that Nikon and Canon feel can be had? Hard to say. On the one hand from what I can tell, for certain high powered optics even Nikon and Canon are in the Leitz camp of all metal construction. (And the prices of those optics reflect that decision.) But what about shorter lenses? Do they need to be finished to the degree that Leitz (and Zeiss) do it?

    Some may say no. And that may be worth considering. Others have expressed appreciation of the solidity of the metal lens construction. And how it makes the lens 'feel' worthy of the stellar price it commanded.

    On the other hand, why not? After all, how many of us really subject our cameras to the kind of daily abuse Leitz envisions? An occasional roughness now and then but not day in and day out. (This is akin to asking someone do they really need a HUMMER when a Honda CR-V will go to the convenient store just as easily to pick up a quart of milk?)

    My thinking is yes and no. Would I like to see Leitz optics that are finished to the nth degree and priced accordingly? You betcha. Would I like to see some Leitz optics finished to sufficiently withstand the daily rigors of typical usage by the vast majority of those likely to use their optics? You betcha.

    Let's see.

    Peter
    Last edited by peterb; 7th January 2009 at 08:31.
    Life is an infinite series of moments called..."now".
    My job is to capture them.

  33. #33
    Senior Member nostatic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    socal
    Posts
    1,037
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    One reason I like Pentax is that they still make all-metal lenses. While there may actually enhanced performance using plastics in the construction, the "user interface" should not be underplayed, and to borrow from Porsche, "there is no substitute" when comparing the feel of machined metal vs. plastic/composite.

    Maybe it is retro or old-school, but business is about differentiation, and building lenses out of metal is what sets some camera makers apart. If they change, then they are into Canikon territory where they likely cannot compete. The body is one thing - that is the heart of the "tech" which roughly follows Moore's law. The lens is another, and I think there will always be a place for someone who sticks with a design aesthetic combined with performance.

    Then again, I'm a heretic because I've never found the M8 to be particularly svelte. To me it is an anachronism that is big on vibe and aesthetic, arguable has good output (if you're willing to work it), but "svelte"? That word doesn't come to mind when I hold it. Of course it is all relative...I suppose next to a D3 it is a little lighter and smaller, but compared to something like the G1 and what could come of that?

  34. #34
    Senior Member peterb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Tysons Corner, Virginia
    Posts
    490
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    18

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    Quote Originally Posted by nostatic View Post
    One reason I like Pentax is that they still make all-metal lenses. While there may actually enhanced performance using plastics in the construction, the "user interface" should not be underplayed, and to borrow from Porsche, "there is no substitute" when comparing the feel of machined metal vs. plastic/composite.

    Maybe it is retro or old-school, but business is about differentiation, and building lenses out of metal is what sets some camera makers apart. If they change, then they are into Canikon territory where they likely cannot compete. The body is one thing - that is the heart of the "tech" which roughly follows Moore's law. The lens is another, and I think there will always be a place for someone who sticks with a design aesthetic combined with performance.

    Then again, I'm a heretic because I've never found the M8 to be particularly svelte. To me it is an anachronism that is big on vibe and aesthetic, arguable has good output (if you're willing to work it), but "svelte"? That word doesn't come to mind when I hold it. Of course it is all relative...I suppose next to a D3 it is a little lighter and smaller, but compared to something like the G1 and what could come of that?
    Excellent point about the 'user interface'. Most of the reviews I've read on Leitz and Zeiss often include a sentence or two waxing on about the smoothness of the mechanism or the 'solidity' of feel. Very important considerations that help communicate value to the user in terms of the experience.

    As for using the word 'svelte' well...I agree that's subjective. One photographer's svelte is another shooter's Rubenesque.

    For the most part I've found most digital translations of the film versions that once held sway to be fatter, chubbier and clubbier than what existed before. Aside from the the Olympus' teeny DSLR (I forget which model number but it's here on this 4/3s section), most have been HUGE. And hefty. Surprsingly so considering that so much of the stuff for the film like the chambers, take-up reels, winding mechanisms and the like are just not necessary. And with electronics getting tinier and tinier I have frankly been surprised why everything needed to be so big.

    The fact that the M8 was only marginally larger than its film predecessor was all the more striking to me. And part of the appeal.

    Peter
    Life is an infinite series of moments called..."now".
    My job is to capture them.

  35. #35
    Senior Member barjohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Galveston, TX
    Posts
    947
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    171

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    I too like the feel of metal but there is a middle ground that we can see in the older Nikon AF-D primes that are plastic (with some metal) but have a very good feel compared to the more current all plastic VR versions. On the other hand, if weight is a factor, every ounce you eliminate is one less ounce to lug around. Even a tiny camera is not very pocketable if it weighs so much that the material in you shirt or pants pocket is sagging under the load. Also, speaking of aesthetics, how well do the finishes hold up over time? We have plenty of examples of used lenses that look terribly beat-up and that diminishes their value, even if they work fine.

    I know that in general the Leica lenses are well made though how well they hold up in different weather and climate conditions is questionable in my mind. How many of us would want to subject a $6K lens to rough climate conditions and hope the lens survived unscathed? I would rather have a good $200 lens and if it doesn't survive, well I can replace it.
    V/r John

  36. #36
    Senior Member nostatic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    socal
    Posts
    1,037
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    Quote Originally Posted by barjohn View Post
    On the other hand, if weight is a factor, every ounce you eliminate is one less ounce to lug around. Even a tiny camera is not very pocketable if it weighs so much that the material in you shirt or pants pocket is sagging under the load.
    21/3.2
    140g, 1" long



    40/2.8
    90g, 0.6" long


    43/1.9
    155g, 1.1" long

  37. #37
    Senior Member peterb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Tysons Corner, Virginia
    Posts
    490
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    18

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    John,

    The thing I can't fathom is why a 35mm f2.0 lens from Leitz goes for $2795 (B&H prices out of NYC) while a similar 35mm f2.0 from Zeiss for the M mount goes for $877. According to reviewers like Sean Reid both lenses are superbly built and unless you're really pixel peeping the Zeiss may outperform the Leitz. Other than a warranty for the butter-fingered, what the hell do you get for that extra $1918?

    And weight wise, the 14-45mm kit lens is around .43 lb.

    Leitz lenses generally weigh in around a half pound to a lb-and-a-half (for some of the super optics that suck in every photon of light technically possible for the sensor).

    Zeiss generally fares better weighing in between under half a pound to a full pound (for their 85mm f2.0 which would be a 170mm f2.0 equiv.).

    And when you consider the super duper Zuiko 4/3 zooms you're talking serious lb-age here (and that's not including the 4/3/s adapter!).

    Overall, most aren't too bad. But when you want better light gathering capability (which is always helpful to avoid using the higher ISO's in order to keep the noise down) some of these glass porkers could use the lens equivalent of Jenny Craig.

    That said, while the substantial-ness of materials used in some newer Nikons and Canons is quite good in terms of their ability to weather the wear and tear of things remember, these are autofocus lenses not manual focus like the M lenses. And I wonder how much of the decision was for using the lighter materials was to ease the wear and tear on the ultrasonic focusing mechanisms vs what the user needs since they must have reasoned that even though manual focusing would be possible, for 99% of the time users of these cameras are typically in autofocus mode. Which explains the emphasis on making sure the tactile user experience using the zoom ring not be compromised.

    Interestingly, when Zeiss makes manual lenses for M cameras they go all out and make them the traditional way out of metal and well greased for the long haul under many conditions. But when they make the autofocus lenses for Sony, they use all plastic like Nikon and Canon do (who, by the way, go metal in their more powerful zoom telephoto optics). And again I wonder how much the decision is based on optimizing the weight for the sake of accuracy and low and wear and tear on the ultrasonic auto focus motors over an option for manual focus.

    The Lumix kit lens is a refreshing exception to the loosy goosy feel I'd experienced manually focusing some of these later Nikon optics that use the lower weight plastics over metal. And I wonder if some middle ground might be achieved as you suggested.

    Peter
    Life is an infinite series of moments called..."now".
    My job is to capture them.

  38. #38
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,848
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    I was looking at those Pentax lenses a few days ago, too bad the first two don't have aperture rings...

  39. #39
    Senior Member peterb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Tysons Corner, Virginia
    Posts
    490
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    18

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    Nostatic (great name by the way),

    I agree. The less you lug the better. But considering what boulders DSLR's have become, even with the all metal lenses of the likes of Zeiss and Leitz with a G1 it's a vast improvement in terms of what you have to lug around vs what I've seen some folks lumbering around with.

    Peter
    Life is an infinite series of moments called..."now".
    My job is to capture them.

  40. #40
    Senior Member barjohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Galveston, TX
    Posts
    947
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    171

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    At least, with the G1, you don't need a roll-aboard to carry your camera and lenses on a trip.
    V/r John

  41. #41
    Senior Member nostatic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    socal
    Posts
    1,037
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    Quote Originally Posted by peterb View Post
    Nostatic (great name by the way),

    I agree. The less you lug the better. But considering what boulders DSLR's have become, even with the all metal lenses of the likes of Zeiss and Leitz with a G1 it's a vast improvement in terms of what you have to lug around vs what I've seen some folks lumbering around with.

    Peter
    I agree, that is one reason I have the Pentax gear. The top of the line body isn't that big (smaller/lighter than a D300), and with a small prime I can carry it in my right hand for long periods pretty comfortably. Not as vanishingly small as the G1 though, but that borders on too small for my hands. I want to try the new K2000 (Km) as it is supposed to be around e410 size. That with one of the pancakes would be very portable. I would really like to see a G1 variant made by Pentax with APS-C sensor and K mount.

    That said I have a Voigt 58/1.4 Nokton waiting for me at the postoffice. Can't wait to slap that on the K20d and see how she runs. If I dig it, the Zeiss 25/2.8 will be next

  42. #42
    Ranger 9
    Guest

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    Quote Originally Posted by nostatic View Post
    One reason I like Pentax is that they still make all-metal lenses.
    Doesn't an "all-metal" lens make the view through the finder kinda dark? :-P

  43. #43
    Senior Member nostatic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    socal
    Posts
    1,037
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    Quote Originally Posted by Ranger 9 View Post
    Doesn't an "all-metal" lens make the view through the finder kinda dark? :-P
    Not if it is reallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyre allyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreal lyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreally reallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyre allyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreal lyreally thin metal.

    Glass is over-rated...

  44. #44
    Senior Member peterb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Tysons Corner, Virginia
    Posts
    490
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    18

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    Quote Originally Posted by nostatic View Post
    I agree, that is one reason I have the Pentax gear. The top of the line body isn't that big (smaller/lighter than a D300), and with a small prime I can carry it in my right hand for long periods pretty comfortably. Not as vanishingly small as the G1 though, but that borders on too small for my hands. I want to try the new K2000 (Km) as it is supposed to be around e410 size. That with one of the pancakes would be very portable. I would really like to see a G1 variant made by Pentax with APS-C sensor and K mount.

    That said I have a Voigt 58/1.4 Nokton waiting for me at the postoffice. Can't wait to slap that on the K20d and see how she runs. If I dig it, the Zeiss 25/2.8 will be next
    Before I got the G1 what you were considering was exactly where I was headed. Years ago I owned a Kyocera Contax 139, a great camera with a built in motor drive. The thing about Contax was they had Zeiss lenses. And I recall the first time I got shots back how my jaw droopped when I saw the photos. The colors the contrast the sharpness was just amazing to me. A number of years later a firm in the photo district (Ken Hansens) was having a fire sale on Leica R4sP SLRs. The model was being discontinued and they snapped up all the remaining U.S inventory and then sold bodies for $300. A total steal!

    I bought one, rented a lens and eventually gravitated to the Leica's SLR's picking up the 35mm and 90mm Summicron's, used. The shots weren't bad. But I missed the Contax. I eventually moved on to an M6 and stayed with that until the digital age. Again very happy with the results but still feeling a yearning for the Zeiss approach.

    My first move to digital was the Leica D2. Nice camera. Then I got the LX1 and for the last few years I've enjoyed using these cameras.

    This last fall I decided maybe it was time to really get something 'serious'. So candidates were the Nikon D300 and D700, and the Pentax K20D.

    Why? Because I wanted to use Zeiss optics again. I didn't care that they were manual. I figured they were fully linked in aperture priority and with focus assist (and the fact that you could get a traditional microprism focusing screen it would work.

    Well I held the D700 and the D300 and concluded they were just too damned big. For all the reasons others have cited. I felt they were like boulders. I also considered the new D90 but that didn't quite feel smallish in my hands the way I was hoping. Still a little chubby and clubby for my tastes.

    I wanted to check out the Pentax as I'd seen on dpreview.com that the dimensions were quite good compared with the D300 and D700. What's more, unlike any other DSLR in its price range the Pentax was totally weather sealed. Having fried a Ricoh GR-D on a heli-hiking trip, that was a big plus.

    But the camera shop I went to in Boston kinda put a bit of a jinx on that saying that Pentax wasn't the same since Hoya took them over and that their viability as a company was quesitonable and that their customer service was lax..blah blah blah..and so I never actually held it in my hands.

    Then I read about the G1 and the possibility of mounting M lenses (read Zeiss for me) via an adapter to its body and I was once again intrigued. Would I be able to use focus assist? No. But the focus patch was soooooo much better than the EVF manual focusing experience I had with Digilux 2 that I was sold.

    But I think it's great that you are looking into the either of the Pentax (I'd go for the K20D if for no other reason aside from a nice size that the thing has weather seals throughout).

    Love to see the kinds of shots you'd get.

    Good thinking, man.

    Peter
    Life is an infinite series of moments called..."now".
    My job is to capture them.

  45. #45
    Senior Member nostatic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    socal
    Posts
    1,037
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    Hi Peter,

    I've had the K20d since it first came out. I had a Nikon D70 and decided it was time to upgrade. I was drawn to Pentax for a number of reasons, got the K10d but didn't really like it. I took it back and was about to get a D200 or D300 when the K20d came out. I tried it and was hooked. Mostly due to the lenses available and the ergos.

    Most of these were taken with the K20d: http://nostatic.com/yos08/ and these are a mix of the Pentax but mostly Leica Dlux3: http://nostatic.com/photos/hk08/

    I now have a handful of the Pentax primes and they are on the camera almost all the time. While I sometime long for FF (mostly when I pixel peep), I can't argue with the output. I've printed 24x36 with great results.

    I did buy a G1 for my g/f as she needed a "dSLR" (or I should say higher rez camera than a p&s), and have so far been impressed. It'll be interesting to see how that all evolves.

  46. #46
    Senior Member back alley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    the frozen north
    Posts
    428
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    3

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    jake the spammer!

  47. #47
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    Looks like Jack got the spammer. Sorry folks
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  48. #48
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    214
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    If anybody is interested, a new review of the G1 is on the pop photo website:

    http://www.popphoto.com/cameras/5686...ed.html?cid=10

  49. #49
    Senior Member peterb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Tysons Corner, Virginia
    Posts
    490
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    18

    Re: G1 Review on PopPhoto

    I had bought the magazine with the review last month and for some reason the web link is missing a page of lab report stuff. The results page is there but the lab stuff isn't. Odd.

    Peter
    Life is an infinite series of moments called..."now".
    My job is to capture them.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •