is lack of in-body IS an issue with the GF1?

[psyiko]

I'm trying to decide between the e-p2 or the gf1 and I'm leaning heavily towards the gf1. One thing holding me back is the lack of in-body image stabilization. I've never had a camera with IS so I don't know what I'm missing out on. I had a chance to play around with both cameras but I couldn't really tell the difference.

Do you guys find that image stabilization is really effective at what it's supposed to do? Do you ever find yourself wishing that your GF1 had IS? I figure with how fast the 20mm is that you wouldn't need the IS.

Another thing holding me back from buying the GF1 is that I know as soon as I buy it, a m4/3rd camera with an internal viewfinder is going to be released... but that's a whole other thread.

 

[scottwallick]

IS is probably one of those things that you miss once you get used to having it. After film and then the M9, when I shoot with the GF1 + Pany 20/1.7 I don't perceive a need for IS.

 

[t.s.k.]

In-body stabilization is handy if you use third party lenses without IS.
I used M lenses on my e-p2 and it can give me up to an extra stop on low light.
The gf1 doesn't give me that option.

YMMV

 

[justins7]

I have a GF1 and use it with manual focus lenses. Having never used a camera with I.S. -- I'm a Leica user -- I don't really know what I am missing. I do use the kit lens sometimes (with IS), but it still seems as hard to keep steady at slow shutter speeds as a film camera. The best thing I did, however, was to buy the EVF, which has helped me keep shots steadier by allowing me to hold the camera tighter when composing. Now I can hand-hold shots at 1/8 (or even 1/4 at times) with a 1.4 lens wide open.

 

[Rooster]

I don't miss IS. I do a lot of B&W conversions with my GF1 files, and the grain pattern produced by the GF1 at high ISO is rather nice.

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

I really missed it, having gotten accustomed to it with Pentax DSLR's, which I replaced with m4/3. So I eventually sold my GF1 and went with the E-P2. They are both great cameras, but the IS makes a huge, huge difference to me. So I'd have to recommend the E-P2.

 

[kuzano]

The IS is a non issue for me. But....

The IS is a non issue for me. But....

Reports of better jpgs from the Olympus, and reports that to gain full or best color rendition from the GF-1, you should shoot RAW is a GF-1 deal killer.

From Dpreview..partial on cons:

"Conclusion - Cons

• Dynamic range and high ISO output not quite as good as best in class (including Olympus E-P1)
• JPEG output nowhere near as good as it could be - shoot raw for best results
• Default settings don't produce particularly appealing (JPEG) color"

I don't want to shoot exclusively RAW to get the best from a camera, and that is suggested in reviews on the GF-1. It appears that there are workarounds on all but the suggestion to shoot RAW.

 

[Nick De Marco]

I now own both cameras

The GF1 is a better camera and the 20/f1.7 lens the best micro 4/3rds lens out there. You can get it as a kit for a better price. The controls are much more friendly than on the ep2, and the AF is quick. I also have the Panny 7-14mm f4 lens which is very nice. If you are only going to use 4/3rds lenses with AF the GF1 is the way to go.

Bt as I also like using manual lenses I ended up getting the ep2 as well. Not so much for IS, although that helps, but because the EVF is much better than the Panny (I have both) so far easier to focus MF lenses. If you use the ep2 for this then you don't miss slow AF and the amount of overcrowded controls is something you can get over. The art modes and colours on the ep2 are fun too.

 

[Rooster]

I don't want to shoot exclusively RAW to get the best from a camera, and that is suggested in reviews on the GF-1.

Tough. That happens to be the case with any digital camera in existence. To get the best from a camera, RAW is required.

 

[Wiyum]

IS is a wonderful tool, but it isn't a solution for all troubles. Think of issues you've had with film or non-IS digital. Are your shots blurry because you cannot hold the camera steady, or are they blurry because your subjects move? Both?

IS allows you to use longer shutter speeds, but subject movement always comes into play and will limit your speeds regardless.

The GF1 has the better kit lens, the EP cameras have IS. For me, the ergonomics of the EP cameras were simply unacceptable regardless. I personally cannot operate the control wheel on the back without pressing it in one of the four directions that also function as a 4-way controller. Many people don't have this problem, but I did.

IS is nice, but handle both cameras first and make that part of your choice. Also, consider the GF1 kit lens. Ergonomics aside, economics prevented me from getting an EP body with the Panasonic lens on its own, and that 20mm is awfully nice.

 

[Finder]

You can think of IS as a built-in monopod or steady cam.

 

[kuzano]

I don't think I said RAW was not the best...

I don't think I said RAW was not the best...

Tough. That happens to be the case with any digital camera in existence. To get the best from a camera, RAW is required.

I think my point was that I want at least as good JPG output as it's counterparts.

Good JPG output is acceptable to me. When I want better than acceptable, I will shoot RAW. However, I dislike being forced to shoot RAW in order to get the results that I can approach with JPG in other cameras.

That's what takes the GF-1 off my short list of acceptable camera's.

Pay attention more closely to posts before responding with "TOUGH"! That's fairly aggressive and rude.

 

[ampguy]

I'm with you here

I'm with you here

I need great JPG output. Canons have it, Seems like the Oly's have it too.

Maybe the G2/G10 will be better in this regard. We'll see.

I think my point was that I want at least as good JPG output as it's counterparts.

Good JPG output is acceptable to me. When I want better than acceptable, I will shoot RAW. However, I dislike being forced to shoot RAW in order to get the results that I can approach with JPG in other cameras.

That's what takes the GF-1 off my short list of acceptable camera's.

Pay attention more closely to posts before responding with "TOUGH"! That's fairly aggressive and rude.

 

[kbg32]

I really like the GF-1. I use the Panasonic lenses, so IS is not an issue since it is built into their lenses. Hey, your Leica M doesn't have IS! Is that a problem??

 

[Pancake]

I nearly went for the Oly as it had IS but having tried the gf1 with the 20mm i cant see IS would really benefit a little fast prime like that, even in fairly low light. My handheld pics with the 20mm seem very sharp. I am still tempted to buy the oly as well to see how it compares 🙂

 

[psyiko]

I really like the GF-1. I use the Panasonic lenses, so IS is not an issue since it is built into their lenses. Hey, your Leica M doesn't have IS! Is that a problem??

haha no it's not a problem. that's what i thought too but everyone claiming that the in body IS for the Oly was "sooo great" i got a little confused. I think i'm going to get a GF1.

Amazon pricing is weirding me out though. 2 days ago it was $880, yesterday it was $890, today it's 899.50 (whoo $0.50 saving!) so I don't know what's going on. The GF1 with the kit lens got a real discount, so I'm waiting til the GF1 dips below 800$.

 

[jsrockit]

People did without IS for so long. Just buy the camera you want... none of them are perfect.

 

[kuzano]

Rather bold comment on E-PL1, but....

Rather bold comment on E-PL1, but....

I need great JPG output. Canons have it, Seems like the Oly's have it too.

Maybe the G2/G10 will be better in this regard. We'll see.

This review is yet another reason I think I will solve my desire for a good JPG OOC image maker....see the review and blow up some of those pics:

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2010/04/07/the-olympus-e-pl1-review-the-best-jpeg-camera-ever/

Again, yes I understand I can tweak RAW for a bit more image quality.

However, after working on computers for 20 plus years, I choose not to spend my retirement in front of another computer.

This looks good enough for me, and a value at $600.

 

[ampguy]

Thanks

Thanks

good reading. Tempting, but I don't need another camera. I even wonder why I have all these 4/3rd adapters lying around 😉

This review is yet another reason I think I will solve my desire for a good JPG OOC image maker....see the review and blow up some of those pics:

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2010/04/07/the-olympus-e-pl1-review-the-best-jpeg-camera-ever/

Again, yes I understand I can tweak RAW for a bit more image quality.

However, after working on computers for 20 plus years, I choose not to spend my retirement in front of another computer.

This looks good enough for me, and a value at $600.