the panasonic gh-1 (unsung brilliance?)

emraphoto

emraphoto

Veteran
Local time
6:00 AM
Joined
Oct 20, 2005
Messages
3,773
View My Gallery
i have been reading up on this wonder of a camera and cannot help but think that it would be a fine bit of gear for photojournalism.

most of the reviews are pretty much cut and paste from the next one so i was curious whether there is some first hand experience floating around here?

it seems VERY capable and i have no doubts there. i guess my questions would be geared towards handling and durability.

odd that such a capable and compact machine has largely gone unnoticed?
 
if i have it right, the big difference between the gh1 and the g1 is video capability?

i think (assume) that many still shooters are just not that into video, at least, i'm not.

i do agree that the g1 is getting lost in the crowd and for my money is the best of the bunch.
 
I have been clinging to my film camera's. So the G1, and after selling it on EBay, the GH1 ( I bought the G1 on EBay for $400 last March w/ the kit lens and sold it for $585, so I actually made money on a digital camera) is my first non P&S digital camera.

I was originally attracted to the G M/43 series for a way to reuse my M Lenses and a couple of old Canon FD lenses.

The image quality of alternative lenses with an adapter is OK, but the kit lenses are actually better IMO, maybe its that they are aspheric, contemporary in design, and use software correction, my M Lenses are Canadian made, and 20 years old, so I got some good results, but feel that the Panasonic lenses are so good, and they have the ability to use state of the art AF, and the 2 lenses I have added - the 7-14mm and the 20mm 1.7 are so, so good that I rarely use the adapter much anymore.


The GH1 is probably on par with what I get scanned from my M4-P with Portra 400, if I stay below 11x14, but then I still favor 120, and nothing digital can touch Mamiya 6 -120 Portra 160NC scanned with the Epson Coolscan 9000. The 5D/Nikon 700 are not in that league, but for digital my Lumix GH1 fills the niche.

Video, be forewarned, requires more editing - to present something that is interesting. I have learned, I have bored people with HD videos of my cats, but I don't have the hours of attention required to sit in front of Final Cut Pro to put something together that is compelling. I would need a story, good dialogue/narrative, sound and a series of clips, to put something that would cause a viewer to linger, otherwise I am just littering YouTube with numbing nonsense that is pretty much 80% of YouTube anyways.

So, if your focus is film/stills first , with the option of shooting some random HD footage, consider the GF1, just my .02


Back to the image quality and overall opinion on the GH1, I like the EVF, a lot, easier to focus than my Leica, the 20mm pancake is a must have, and the superwide 7-14mm is so much fun, these 2 lenses are almost must haves in my mind. The image quality is very good, again, probably on par with the 35mm ISO 400 scanned images, its small, and easy to carry about. If someone hoists a 5D out at a casual event, people tend to suck in their breath, ... that's a serious camera, and at 4+ pounds , it definitely has gravitas, whereas the Lumix is smaller and more stealth, pretty much in line with the Leica rangefinder philosophy.

Very happy with it.
 
Last edited:
1080 and 720 with autofocus (video) and optional shotgun mic? combined with a platform to shoot with older fd, c, m, f mount etc. swivel viewing screen (or viewfinder).

apparently it does extremely well with video in both formats! i mean taking into account which way the wind is apparently blowing in the press end of the game it seems a very potent bit of gear?
 
The G1, of all things, is presently my favorite camera. I really can't believe what a little delight it is. Images are great. The high-ISO noise is much more film-like than my DSLR's ever was.

I have the GF1 too but can't seem to bring myself to shoot any video. It's just one more thing to worry about...
 
As a former press photographer I can say for myself and most that I know that small size and ability to use all variety of lenses doesn't count for that much. All of the new Canikon DSLRs can do video, and better than the GH/GF1. High iso does matter, flash system does matter. High level build does matter, AF matters. serviceability matters, I can still get my EOS-1D serviced years after it was discontinued. A lineup of lenses that will suit any specialty matters. The Canikons have all of this in *****s.
Press and pros may have a small camera like this to play with (I'm looking at the ep-1 with envy), but there is almost always a Canikon DSLR in the bag for when the shot needs to happen
 
trineonx said:
As a former press photographer I can say for myself and most that I know that small size and ability to use all variety of lenses doesn't count for that much. All of the new Canikon DSLRs can do video, and better than the GH/GF1. High iso does matter, flash system does matter. High level build does matter, AF matters. serviceability matters, I can still get my EOS-1D serviced years after it was discontinued. A lineup of lenses that will suit any specialty matters. The Canikons have all of this in *****s.
Press and pros may have a small camera like this to play with (I'm looking at the ep-1 with envy), but there is almost always a Canikon DSLR in the bag for when the shot needs to happen
Click to expand...

Indeed, and the electronic viewfinder, which is bad in poor light, makes the camera pretty useless for me at least. Except for personal stuff or when you don't want the weight (and don't need the dslr). But for that I prefer the LX3, really sweet camera with a fast (f2) wide lens and smaller than the GH1.
 
Pablito said:
Indeed, and the electronic viewfinder, which is bad in poor light, makes the camera pretty useless for me at least. Except for personal stuff or when you don't want the weight (and don't need the dslr). But for that I prefer the LX3, really sweet camera with a fast (f2) wide lens and smaller than the GH1.
Click to expand...

You probably haven't tried the 20mm 1.7, nor the 7-14mm. These are exceptional lenses, and there are more interesting lenses coming. I think your pretty much stuck with one lens on the LX3. But again back to Video, the quality of the HD isn't something that should be slogged off- it's decent
http://www.vimeo.com/7230012
And half the price of a 5D II. DSLR's are dead man walking IMO, EVF's are the future, flipping mirrors is so 20 years ago. Big changes are afoot in digital photography, 5 years fast forward evreything, anyone one is using today is going to be used about as much as much as my fax machine IMO
 
Don't get me wrong, I love the idea of M4/3. I can't believe how long it took them to market a camera that is a sensor and an interchangeable lens mount in a small package.
But the technology is lacking for many uses.
Once they figure out a proper AF system, high iso capabilities (within a stop of the 5DII would be nice), and a little bit of an upgrade on the viewfinder for the ep-1/gf1 style, I'm all in.
If another manufacturer comes out with a bigger sensor, even better. But that starts to look an awful lot like an M9, can anyone make a full frame interchangeable lens non-DSLR for less than $7,000. Thats what I want to see in 5 years
 
The GH1 can autofocus while shooting video; the Canon can't.

The GH1 can use almost any glass.

I find the EVF is superb in poor light. I can focus in far lower light with it than with an optical viewfinder.

GH1 is a great camera. If you don't need video, the G1 is great. Yeah, there are those that don't like its mini-DSLR look, but it's not a fashion accessory anyway. 😉
 
I am not trying to start a flame war, I thought about what I wrote, that sounded like the Scorpion, I am, so I apologize.
I do think that with EVF's, the Ricoh GRX, we are witnessing a revolutionary change occurring.
Mechanically a single lens reflex housing costs more to produce. EVF's will become the norm. DSLR will phase out, simple economics. I.E. the flat screen vs CRT, or any other trend in technology that has occurred, where one technology surpasses the old, and becomes commonplace.

Adding HD to any camera will also become the norm.

So what is that differentiates the vendors from each other - glass aside ?
The sensors.
The GRX is very, very interesting, but it is a 1.0, so are the M43's, what is occuring in that space, is probably being watched by product managers at Canon/Nikon. The flagship camera's are going to cherry pick the concepts, and the D1/D3, the 1D ,the 5D will probably be full frame w/ EVF's at some iteration.HD is already present as mentioned, being able to swap out the sensor .. , that's somewhat what the GRX offers but not quite.

When Canon/Nikor offer that capability - fullframe, and the ability swap out sensors/cpu's or backs, (or maybe Phase one becomes affordable and offers HD) much like I can swap out Fuji Pro 160 or Kodak Portra or Ilford on my Mamiya 6 - then I am interested in spending >$5K on a camera. Until then I will limp along with my Coolscan 9000, my GH1 and enjoy photography.


GH2 will have HDMI out, the sensor will have to add more MP, it's an exciting system to watch evolve. The GRX is also very interesting, or the vendor that takes the concept further. The future is exciting. But today the GH1 is in my hands, and I didn't pay a fortune for an 8 track tape system 😉
 
well my comments were made regarding (primarily) the gh-1's video capability.

a press photographer and a photojournalist are two different beasts in my eyes however the move to still AND video capability has bridged both. to offer video is a no brainer and it is something i have spent a great deal of time focused (pardon the pun) on and learning about.

i have packed bags of pro nikons on long, long jobs and man it is for the birds. capable and small are very important factors for me and that gh-1 seems to marry the two.

it just seems like a real glimpse of the future and i am surprised it hasn't caused more of a stir.
 
wow! that guy drinks too much coffee!

great set-up though. my understanding is the lens that comes bundled is also a top notch performer!

from all the positive noise coming out of the video crowd it seems like a very viable option that i intend to have a good look at. last year some folks asked me to produce a short documentary that i cordially declined as i am not set-up for it nor am i proficient at video. turning it down has been floating around in the back of my brain since and i reckon it's about time to offer video to my arsenal.
 
The G1 is about all I use now (except for the Dlux 4 as a pocketable camera). The EVF in low light is superb. Where else can you get night vision goggles built into a camera? Auto focus - fast and never has failed me. This is the only digital camera I have ever used so much that I have begun to wear away the rubberized finish. High iso to 800 is fine. 1600 is fine, too, with NoiseNinja. The f1.7 and 8-14mm lenses are great. But I'm not a photojurnalist, so I can't speak for how adequate the camera might be under intense field conditions. It is well-built, but far from bullet-proof.

/T
 
The GH1 just seems expensive. Most of that cost is tied to the lens, which purportedly is very good (and supposedly a good value), but I don't think you can get the camera new without buying the lens.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom