efix
RF user by conviction
(Also posted this in dpr/MFT forums, so apologies if you read it twice)
Hi fellow MFT'ers,
I recently purchased a used Panasonic G1 since I wanted an additional MFT camera with EVF to complement my E-P1. While I really like its form factor as well as ergonomics (I think this still is the most user-friendly of all MFT bodies), I am left a bit underwhelmed with its output, especially where it comes to signal-to-noise-ration and dynamic range.
Coming from a Leica M8 (which I sadly have to part with), the G1's RAW files show very little headroom for post-processing. Bright skies are quickly clipped and hard to impossible to recover, and noise comes creeping in pretty quickly even at base ISO when lifting the shadows. The more light there was in the original scene the less noise is an issue, but the more dynamic range is.
I admit to being spoiled by the M8's files, and I don't pretend that any MFT sensor can offer this much processing latitude. But I was a little frustrated with the G1's output after I used it exclusively during this year's summer holidays in the Alps. In scenes with lots of contrast (i.e. mountain scenes with bright sky and shadowy foreground), I was hardly able to pull the skies and push the shadows without compromising a balanced overall look. With the M8, this never was a problem
So I read a bit into the other MFT models that are in my price range, and it seems the GH1's sensor performs significantly better than the G1's sensor, with approx. one stop more DR and one stop better high ISO performance (i.e. better SNR at all ISOs). However, what I was not able to find was an actual, real-world use comparison between the two cameras
So my question is, to any of you who own or have owned both the G1 and the GH1, how would you describe the differences between the respective cameras' output? Does the GH1 really perform better in terms of DR and SNR (and allegedly also fine detail resolution) than the G1? Will the GH1's output deliver more processing latitude than the G1's
Again, I don't expect the GH1 or any MFT model to perform like the Leica M8, but the G1's performance definitely isn't up to what I need/want from a camera. Btw, before you start recommending me the OM-D E-M5, whose sensor I gather is the best-performing MFT sensor so far, it's out of my price range and I don't like its haptics and ergonomics. The GH2 is also out of the race due to a limited budget
So the question remains: is it worth to upgrade to the GH1, or is the actual performance difference not really that noteworthy? P.S.: I wouldn't mind the Full HD video either
Thanks in advance for your help, guys 'n gals!
Hi fellow MFT'ers,
I recently purchased a used Panasonic G1 since I wanted an additional MFT camera with EVF to complement my E-P1. While I really like its form factor as well as ergonomics (I think this still is the most user-friendly of all MFT bodies), I am left a bit underwhelmed with its output, especially where it comes to signal-to-noise-ration and dynamic range.
Coming from a Leica M8 (which I sadly have to part with), the G1's RAW files show very little headroom for post-processing. Bright skies are quickly clipped and hard to impossible to recover, and noise comes creeping in pretty quickly even at base ISO when lifting the shadows. The more light there was in the original scene the less noise is an issue, but the more dynamic range is.
I admit to being spoiled by the M8's files, and I don't pretend that any MFT sensor can offer this much processing latitude. But I was a little frustrated with the G1's output after I used it exclusively during this year's summer holidays in the Alps. In scenes with lots of contrast (i.e. mountain scenes with bright sky and shadowy foreground), I was hardly able to pull the skies and push the shadows without compromising a balanced overall look. With the M8, this never was a problem
So I read a bit into the other MFT models that are in my price range, and it seems the GH1's sensor performs significantly better than the G1's sensor, with approx. one stop more DR and one stop better high ISO performance (i.e. better SNR at all ISOs). However, what I was not able to find was an actual, real-world use comparison between the two cameras
So my question is, to any of you who own or have owned both the G1 and the GH1, how would you describe the differences between the respective cameras' output? Does the GH1 really perform better in terms of DR and SNR (and allegedly also fine detail resolution) than the G1? Will the GH1's output deliver more processing latitude than the G1's
Again, I don't expect the GH1 or any MFT model to perform like the Leica M8, but the G1's performance definitely isn't up to what I need/want from a camera. Btw, before you start recommending me the OM-D E-M5, whose sensor I gather is the best-performing MFT sensor so far, it's out of my price range and I don't like its haptics and ergonomics. The GH2 is also out of the race due to a limited budget
So the question remains: is it worth to upgrade to the GH1, or is the actual performance difference not really that noteworthy? P.S.: I wouldn't mind the Full HD video either
Thanks in advance for your help, guys 'n gals!
funkydog
Well-known
Rather than give you my subjective opinion, you might like to see the difference for yourself. If you like, I could make G1 and GH1 raw files converted to DNG available for you to download. The shots would be of different subject matter as I own(ed) the cameras at different times. Can someone can suggest a suitable free download hosting service?
Timmy P
Established
I had both, the GH1 was slightly better than the G1, but I found both cameras dynamic range to be fairly poor regardless. If you want wide DR I would recommend the OM-D or Panasonic G5. I know their more expensive but the older m4/3rds cameras really don't have that fantastic DR compared to the newer models.
Timmy P
Established
You can link to files via dropbox pretty easily, I recommend that. You have to link them 1 by 1 though, I don't think you care share entire folders. Perhaps a zip would be best if you have lots of individual files.
efix
RF user by conviction
Thanks for your offer, that would be very nice! No need to convert them to DNG, I think Lr 3 will read them without issues. I have a Dropbox account, so that would be a possible means of transfer.
efix
RF user by conviction
I'd love to have the OM-D for its fantastic image quality, no question. But a) it's out of my price range (well, at least at the moment ... but let's wait til after photokina ;-)) and secondly, as I believe I stated, I don't like its haptics and ergonomics. The G5 also has too few external controls for my taste. The GH2 is also not really within my budget.
efix
RF user by conviction
So, after playing with the GH1 raw files that funkydog was so kind to provide me with, here's my assessment.
The GH1's output shows significantly less noise at base ISO than the G1. Also, they seem to have a little more DR in terms of highlight preservation. Both equate to roughly one stop, from what I can tell.
On the downside, the banding really is pretty strong, especially at higher ISOs. Also, the GH1's files don't show the same pixel-level sharpness as the G1's. In addition, the shadows in the GH1's files drop to black a bit earlier than the shadows in the G1's files, meaning the noise advantage of the GH1 may in part be due to the facts that part of the shadow information is clipped, whereas there's no true "black point" in the G1's files.
Color reproduction is a whole nother issue. None of the two cameras deliver the kind of color accuracy I'm looking for, especially for landscape photography. I don't know how the E-M5 fares in this regard, though, but judging from its DR and noise performance, it is probably closer to what I am looking for than any of the older MFT models.
The funny thing is, technically, I already found the perfect camera in terms of IQ -- the M8. Who knows, maybe a miracle happens and I can keep it after all
And if not ... I guess I'll just have to make some cutbacks in the IQ department ...
The GH1's output shows significantly less noise at base ISO than the G1. Also, they seem to have a little more DR in terms of highlight preservation. Both equate to roughly one stop, from what I can tell.
On the downside, the banding really is pretty strong, especially at higher ISOs. Also, the GH1's files don't show the same pixel-level sharpness as the G1's. In addition, the shadows in the GH1's files drop to black a bit earlier than the shadows in the G1's files, meaning the noise advantage of the GH1 may in part be due to the facts that part of the shadow information is clipped, whereas there's no true "black point" in the G1's files.
Color reproduction is a whole nother issue. None of the two cameras deliver the kind of color accuracy I'm looking for, especially for landscape photography. I don't know how the E-M5 fares in this regard, though, but judging from its DR and noise performance, it is probably closer to what I am looking for than any of the older MFT models.
The funny thing is, technically, I already found the perfect camera in terms of IQ -- the M8. Who knows, maybe a miracle happens and I can keep it after all
And if not ... I guess I'll just have to make some cutbacks in the IQ department ...
maitani
Well-known
I had most of the 43/m43 cameras on the market (even for short time..)
the GH-1 (which i keep for video projects only..) is still the best sensor imo, topping out GH-2 and imo also OM-D, offerst suprisingly good latitude files, but not the good colour from olympus bodys.
the OM-d delivers much cleaner hi-iso, but base iso, not really different than E-P3 for example ... , the GH-1 is still the best at 100-200 because
there is basically no noise (or at least not much)
all 4/3 sensor take a far backseat to the M8 files, which are outstanding (if not classleading) at base iso at least (also including vs. some FF cameras..)
from your requirement above (landscape) the E-P3 could be your ideal choice at the moment / or wait if something new (e-p4) is coming at photokina..
the GH-1 (which i keep for video projects only..) is still the best sensor imo, topping out GH-2 and imo also OM-D, offerst suprisingly good latitude files, but not the good colour from olympus bodys.
the OM-d delivers much cleaner hi-iso, but base iso, not really different than E-P3 for example ... , the GH-1 is still the best at 100-200 because
there is basically no noise (or at least not much)
all 4/3 sensor take a far backseat to the M8 files, which are outstanding (if not classleading) at base iso at least (also including vs. some FF cameras..)
from your requirement above (landscape) the E-P3 could be your ideal choice at the moment / or wait if something new (e-p4) is coming at photokina..