G1 vs M8?

[jl-lb.ms]

Sounds like a silly question, doesn't it? Can anyone here make even a subjective comparison between the G1 and the Leica M8 image quality? I have an M8, but I'd like to pick up a G1 for an extra digital. I have a pile of CV lenses that I can put with it.

thanks,

John

 

[douglasf13]

I would seriously consider the NEX-5. I use the Voigtlander 35/1.4, 50/2.5, 50/1.5 and 85/3.5 (S mount) on the NEX-5, and the tilt up screen is great for manual af. Compared to the G1, you'll get better DR, better high ISO and the crop factor will be much closer to your M8.

 

[goffer]

I agree with Douglas... plus NEX-3/5 came out with a new firmware update recently that makes navigating ISO/Meter/WB/Shutter Speed much easier and intuitive.

 

[ampguy]

Never used a G1, but most photos from them look like they have serious diffraction. Probably OK wide open, lots of correction in Photoshop, and for web use. Nex has a bigger sensor. M8 has an even bigger sensor.

 

[seakayaker1]

I recently picked up a new G1, body only, for $220.00. I am having it converted to use as an IR camera. If cost is a consideration you may want to check out the G1.

I have been using a GF1 for the past several months with several CV lenses, including the ones that you mentioned.

Samples of the panasonic GF1 with Voigtlander lenses can be found here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/26672618@N03/sets/

Good luck with your decision.

Life is Grand!

Dan
~ 😉

 

[PCB_RF]

I very boringly tend to start all these comparison questions with: try before you buy.

You're only asking about IQ, but there may be other issues to consider as well. In addition to IQ concerns, you've got interface concerns, you've got lens compatibility concerns and maybe other concerns. They all matter, you have to figure out how and why for your needs.

IQ: M8 should generally outshoot the G1/GF1, better dynamic range, cleaner hi ISO files, maybe not by a lot, though.

If you put any stock in DXO Mark rankings, G1 is lower than M8, NEX 5 is better than M9 (yeah, M-nine).

The GH1 is better than the G1, the GH2 looks like it will be better than the GH1.

Crop: M8 is 1.3x, NEX is 1.5x, G1 is 2x. G1 loses most of your wides, helps most with 50mm+ lenses.

Lenses: M8 does best with 35mm & wider lenses in the corners at wide apertures. G1 will smear corners more than NEX, but NEX also seems to have RF-legacy wideangle corner issues.

If you have C/V 12-15-21-25 lenses, like to shoot wide-open and like sharp corners, the G1 will generally disappoint, the NEX might be marginally better.

Interface: M8 and G1/NEX are night/day, totally different, even if you try using OVFs on the G1/NEX. NEX interface seems much improved for enthusiasts with the new firmware. I've always liked Pany's interface, but the GF1/G10/G2 do finder/screen zoom for manual focus easier than the G1.

NEX has no EVF, G1 has an excellent onboard EVF. I really need the EVF, some do fine without.

Will you love live view or only tolerate it?

Other Stuff: NEX has video, G1 doesn't.

Can anyone here make even a subjective comparison between the G1 and the Leica M8 image quality? I have an M8, but I'd like to pick up a G1 for an extra digital. I have a pile of CV lenses that I can put with it.

 

[jl-lb.ms]

Thanks for the comments, all. PCB, I agree with the comments about ergonomics. I like the form fit of the G1, but was concerned about the images. (That is, I'm predisposed for the G1.) The Nex has been recommended repeatedly, and while it may be great in terms of IQ, I can't stand the sight of a huge (or less) lens on a tiny P&S style camera. Please don't flame me; it's just a preference. I like the idea of something that I can hold to my eye for an image, but still have the option of arms-length shooting. I don't care about video; thus, I'm not looking very hard at the G2. Don't want to spend a ton; hard to justify when I have an M8 in hand.

Crop factor is a major concern, but at least there are some very short lenses available from Lumix et al. (If only Carl Zeiss had a zoom for micro 4/3...)

Still pondering...

 

[jl-lb.ms]

GREAT flickr stream, Sea Kayaker!!!

 

[douglasf13]

I use a Leitz 50mm Brightline finder with my NEX-5 and 35/1.4 Nokton, and it gives me the best of both worlds (when zone focusing.)

FWIW, the NEX-5 still looks pretty good with rangefinder lenses, proportionally. I do agree that most SLR lenses look pretty ridiculous on it.

 

[Dogman]

I have never used the Nex so consider that when reading my opinion. I know it's the "Brand New Thing" which makes it appealing to many. Plus the Nex sounds like a great camera with excellent features but the issue for me is the size. Look at the dpreview comparison photos: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/SonyNex5Nex3/

My hands are large. Despite some familiarity with using both my E-P1 and G1, I still have difficulty with the small size and my thumb sometimes pushing two buttons at once and left hand fingers finding a place to support when shooting eye level. Considering that and the fact that I have too many cameras now, the Nex doesn't appeal to me even if it would produce better image quality. There's more to shooting pictures than absolute image quality, IMO.

As for the G1, it does allow you to use Leica-M mount lenses at eye level. The EVF is okay but not optical VF quality by any means. It does beat the snot out of trying to manually focus lenses on the LCD at arm's length, at least for me. It's more SLR-like than Leica-like, if that's important.

I have no experience with the M8, however, I always found the film M-series Leicas to be perfectly sized and a joy to use. It's too bad I'll never be able to afford a digital M.

 

[douglasf13]

I use a Leitz 50mm Brightline finder with my NEX-5 and 35/1.4 Nokton, and it gives me the best of both worlds (when zone focusing.)

FWIW, the NEX-5 still looks pretty good with rangefinder lenses, proportionally. I do agree that most SLR lenses look pretty ridiculous on it.

Here is an example of the camera with the Leitz Brightline attached:

 

[jl-lb.ms]

Nice rig there!

 

[250swb]

I can't really comment on the M8 because I have an M9, with the G1 as my 'DSLR' (type) of choice. I don't feel I need to justify images based on IQ when showing each side by side, they stand or fall by the image, not pixel peeping. But the G1 does a very decent job, and like the M9 (M8) is what I would call a photographers camera, all the main important things are really easy to get at and adjust and are very intuitive.

The two main kit lenses (14-45 and 45-200) are good but slow, well worth using though. And as a 'DSLR' (type) camera its not duplicating the ethos of the M9 (M8) so you aren't ending up with two 'rangefinder' (style) cameras. I'm so happy with my G1 I'm planning on the GH2 when it is released. I think Panasonic are right on the money when it comes to design and features at the moment, and the IQ is darned good, good enough to show alongside an M9's output without apologising.

Steve

 

[jl-lb.ms]

Steve, thank you. That's exactly the comment I was looking for.

Great flickr stream also.

 

[cz23]

I no longer have an M8, but I still print files alongside those from my 5DII and GF1. My experience is that you won't seem much IQ difference in prints to 12 x 16" or so, which is the largest I've tested.

The big difference I see is that the m4/3 files have less headroom for post-processing. The m4/3 files just don't hold up as well to aggressive post work. But if exposure is good and you don't manipulate much, I really don't think you'll see any difference, at least in prints.

John

 

[DNG]

Don't have an M8, (I have a Pentax K20d though). here are a few with a G1 and a Zeiss 50mm f/1.5 C-Sonnar with 14mm worth of close-up extensions.

ISO 400 on all of them. Ran through Neat Image Pro after Post was done.
​

​

​

 

[usayit]

I have an M8 and G1 but recently switch over to the E-PL1. I pretty much agree with everything PCB_RF (Hi btw...). In terms of image quality, my eyes tell me the M8 produces better images when using the same adapted lenses. I've only used lenses 35mm and longer on it due to the same reasons already mentioned. Never the less... its a lightweight and very capable camera to throw in the bag with the M8 and offers a different use for the same set of lenses you already carry for the M8. EVF is very good (surprisingly good) although I find the keys require to bring up magnification a pain. There's also the obvious mental switch going between the two. I doubt its going to be a deal breaker but the onboard G1 flash never did work with adapted lenses.

With that said, I frankly find the E-PL1 a better camera/companion which is why the E-PL1 has replaced the G1. Knowing what I know now, I'd probably recommend waiting for a good deal on a used E-PL1 w/ VF2 attachment. I think image quality is a bit better than the G1, in body IS is useful with all adapted lenses, and I like the dedicated magnification button.

On a recent family trips, I had my normal bag with an M8 and R-D1. Throwing the G1 + adapter was a might nice novelty with little extra weight.

quick sample of a G1 + 90mm Summarit @ ISO 640 1/30 f/2.5

 

[Xherion]

Hi John,

Looks like your mind is set for G1, but i can second Douglas' and PCB's input here.
I've used several M lenses with NEX5 (see my sig) with very good result.

Only problem is the edge color shifting on 15mm Heliar with NEX, although this is still better than the G1/EP1 sample that i have seen.

NEX5 looks very nice paired with most M lenses.

 

[maenju]

everything that usayit said: I also use the M8 with the E-PL1 as a backup and previously had the G1. The E-PL1 is a more accomplished camera in terms of IQ and compactness, but you absolutely need the EVF, at least if you want to use your M lenses without magnification, which I would usually tend to do. My current lineup are 28, 50 and 90mm M lenses as well as the Olympus mFT ultra wide (9-18) and 20mm pancake. A very versatile kit that gets me from 18mm to 180mm (35mm equiv) in excellent quality and weighing about 2 kilos.
I disagree with the notion that the Nex or other 1,5 crop cameras are better companions for the M8 -- indeed, I prefer the 2x crop as it will spread out your lens lineup more (provided that you want to adapt your M lenses) and image quality isn't significantly worse than APS-C under most conditions.
The Vietnam, Saigon, Manila and Tondo albums on my flickr stream was exclusively shot with the G1 by the way, mostly with the 20/1.7 pancake...

/edit: back to the original question of image quality between G1/mFT and M8 -- of course the level of detail capture on the M8 is astounding and far superior, and there is that certain "something" to the Leica captures that seem to escape most other cams, but the mFT can certainly hold its ground and you could comfortably show the files next to one another in normal viewing sizes (and most of the time not be able to point out any obvious differences)

 

[dee]

In my mind a G1 is ' much better than a compact ' rather than a rival for the M8 .
Mine was £280 ex-dem , so I was paying compact prices .
I love the 67mm offered by 50mm lenses on the M8 , so my CV 35f2.5 becomes a neat , light 70 on the G1 .
I also have a typical lazy all auto zoom for casual shots .
Both the G1 and M8 will shortly be adapted for Contax / Kiev , so adding a reasonably Helios / J3 / J8 and rigid 50 F2 Sonnar to the mix .
Perfect !