What's the fuss over the G1?

A

aad

Not so new now.
Local time
12:09 AM
Joined
Oct 13, 2005
Messages
1,229
I was buying film today, and saw a G1 on the shelf-in a sort of pink color, but...

Anyway, they let me play with it, it feels great, I liked the viewfinder, not so much the price, but I though it looked no smaller than an Olympus SLR.

There was an Oly 410 on the shelf-compared them in hand, and the Olympus E-410 is smaller than a G1. And with 2 lenses, is about half the price.

I though the new format was going to give us great images in a package smaller than an SLR. While the G1 seemed very nice, it isn't small.

So besides being a nice camera, where's the breakthrough?
 
aad said:
I was buying film today, and saw a G1 on the shelf-in a sort of pink color, but...

Anyway, they let me play with it, it feels great, I liked the viewfinder, not so much the price, but I though it looked no smaller than an Olympus SLR.

There was an Oly 410 on the shelf-compared them in hand, and the Olympus E-410 is smaller than a G1. And with 2 lenses, is about half the price.

I though the new format was going to give us great images in a package smaller than an SLR. While the G1 seemed very nice, it isn't small.

So besides being a nice camera, where's the breakthrough?
Click to expand...

It's the first EVF (non SLR) with removable lenses. As a side-effect, since it has no mirror box or pentaprism, the lens can sit much closer to the sensor than the typical SLR - must like a rangefinder camera does. And because of that, there are a number of adapters hitting the market that let people put their M lenses and other kinds of lenses on this camera and enjoy 4/3 digital sensor photos with older (perhaps better) prime lenses intended for other camera systems. One of the biggies has been people trying it as a potential 'poor man's M8'.

I'm not sure it's anything I want just yet, but it does show some groundbreaking technologies that will no doubt pave the way going forward.
 
I've wondered the same thing. But I think it is that a lot of people using film Leicas actually want to switch to digital but the M8 is so expensive they've not been able to make the move. The G1 gives them a way to make the move to digital. It's relatively cheap, has good image quality, and other than the 2x crop factor, appears to be just as good as the Leica for most people's use.
 
Many people just want to use excellent M-mount lenses without the hassle of film.
They are willing to put up with the loss of the whole rangefinder focusing experience to get the use of the small and high-quality lenses.

For me it's not worth it, but it might be for others. I think it comes down to the main reason you used RFs in the first place. Some just wanted the smaller size while others prefer the framing and focusing differences. A third reason is to use nice and compact wide-angle lenses. Of course with the G1 you only get advantage 1.
 
Last edited:
Is it really much of a savings when you have to have super wide (and therefore super slow) m mount glass to overcome the obscene crop ratio? It seems to me like a used epson rd-1 would end up being a better overall value for money in the long run.
 
Sam N said:
Many people just want to use excellent M-mount lenses without the hassle of film.
They are willing to put up with the loss of the whole rangefinder experience to get the use of the small and high-quality lenses.

For me it's not worth it, but it might be for others.
Click to expand...

Don't knock it until you've tried it. :)

I love my RFs but the G1 is really a blast to shoot with, even without the M-lenses. I haven't had this much fun since I started shooting with RF cameras. The G1 is much closer to the "whole rangefinder experience" than a dSLR or a p&s. For me that has a lot to do with the EVF and particularly the s/t LCD. It's an entirely different way to shoot. It's kind of a melding of RF and ground glass and video.

There's a reason why I think the G1 has found a small population of admirers here on RFF. It might not be for you, but I think it's wrong to assume something is being "given up," when in fact it's more like something is being gained. I've given up nothing. I've used my RF/SLR/TLR/LF/Film/video experience and techniques and I'm applying it to a new format.

My gain: new techniques, more fun, more use out of my "investments/hardware," and I get to shoot with what I like.

Your gain: you get to keep your money and shoot what you like.


/
 
you can't imagine the fun factor of this camera with m lenses.
it is very like the rf experience in that the camera is small and quiet and not threatening to others at all.
 
I tend to agree with Merkin. The Leica lenses may fit but the whole concept with the 2x crop just seems ridiculous. Leicas are best for 50mm and shorter lenses anyway. You can free yourself from film with a Nikon D40 and the kit lens which is rather plasticky but is very sharp. Or use it with prime lenses and a much more reasonable crop factor. Seems to me the G1 adaptor concept is designed to appeal to gadget fiends, camera buffs who like accessories and adapters of all sorts. Nothing against the camera itself, but fitting M lenses just does not seem terribly practical if your primary purpose is functionality. For some reason the idea of buying a large pizza but eating only a little section from the center just does not seem right to me. But then I am opinionated and grumpy. I like my film Leicas the way they are, for digital I use "normal" digital cameras without fussy adapters. But the camera world (as opposed to the photgraphy world) has always thrived on gadets and gizmos, always plenty of us middle aged men to snap them up. Remember Spiratone? End of rant.:bang:

Edit: I'd be happy to try the camera with the Panasonic standard lesns. Can anyone comment on shutter lag? I love my LX3 but the shuter lag (much better than earlier point n' shoots) is still a little annoying.
 
Last edited:
RayPA said:
Don't knock it until you've tried it. :)
I've given up nothing. I've used my RF/SLR/TLR/LF/Film/video experience and techniques and I'm applying it to a new format.

My gain: new techniques, more fun, more use out of my "investments/hardware," and I get to shoot with what I like.
Click to expand...

Things you give up
1) The ability to see what is outside of the frame
2) The ability to look through the viewfinder with everything in focus
3) The RF method of focusing
4) True wide angle M lenses

Some things you gain
1) Digital capture
2) Ability to use pretty much any lens
3) Small size
4) Cheap price compared to R-D1 or M8
5) Ability to use zooms and AF when you want

I'm not bashing the G1 or saying there's anything wrong with giving up any of these things. I'm just making the point that the G1 has its own set of advantages that are different from (yet partially overlap) the traditional RF advantages.

I am actually very keen to try a G1. I'd really prefer less of a crop factor and more affordable adaptors, but I really like the M4/3 idea and I hope we see more of it.
 
Last edited:
I'm torn between hoping Olympus comes out with something great and just picking up a Nikon D40x and sticking a real focusing screen in her. I've got a few Nikkor primes, perhaps pick up one more (20mm) and I'm set. 20/58/180 and I can walk around all day.

There are some really cool aspects to the 4/3M format though. It can take old C-Mount lenses which open up a very interesting space for both primes and zooms. There are some REALLY FAST primes out there that I would love to see if they live up to their reputation on a still camera. Perhaps there is some folks with Pen F lenses which would ROCK on a 4/3M camera.

The G1 is the first small EVF camera, older Sony cameras had them. Panasonic is starting to understand how some folks use cameras and have developed something better.

B2 (;->
 
I couldnt care less about the G1. It is the last thing I want right now.

What I want is a full frame rangefinder that uses standard length legacy lenses from leica, zeiss, and whatever else.

Give me a smaller packaged 5D and i'll be content and not want another thing in this world.
 
I think that if anyone would be able to execute this evf mirrorless camera concept well, it would probably be nikon. Assuming they didn't throw away the 2000 and 2005 re-release rangefinder tooling, they could be cranking out 35mm and 50mm rangefinder lenses pretty rapidly, as well as autofocus lenses. They could throw a full frame sensor in, and have a smallish body, and they would be able to simultaneously market the camera to rangefinder nerds like us, and to the average joe who wants more than a point and shoot but doesn't need and/or want to lug around a full size dslr. The three biggest things I don't like about the G1 are the sensor crop, the (correct me if I am wrong) inability for there to be a full frame version in the future, and the way they made it way too slr-ish, at least in terms of looks.
 
A D40x works, but can only use Nikkors, and not old ones (unless you want to give up metering.)

The G1 can use Nikkors (and it meters with even the oldest ones) and almost any other lens one can think of.

Everyone was keen on this being the "poor man's M8" but it's really a complementary body to whatever else one already has, film or digital. It is much, much more than just a body that can use M lenses.

BTW, the D40x has a teeny VF. ;)
 
It's interesting that the naysayers here haven't used the G1, while those that have are having way too much fun. Uwe Steinmueller at outbackphoto.com: "We currently test DSLRs with over 20MP resolution. To be honest nothing is more fun than the G1 with the Leica lenses." I want some of that fun! My penny jar for a new G1 is filling up. Then an LTM adapter and an M42 adapter.

As an aside, I don't think you could have that short a flange length with a larger sensor and it's that short flange length that makes the G1 so interesting.
 
nikon or canon is never gonna make a drf, just accept that we are not their typical market audience. if they had an interest it would be on dealer's shelves already.

panasonic made us the closest we are going to get at this price point.
every time a digital comes out there is a backlash of bad chatter because it's not perfect.

well, believe it or not, for me, the g1 is great.
compared to my sony dslr, which i quite like, the g1 is tiny, way more flexible and i doubt hat anyone could tell the difference between photos taken with either camera - except that maybe the g1 shots might be a bit better.
 
One can always put a viewfinder in the hot shoe, set the 15mm CV lens to hyperfocal and use it like an RF :)
 
back alley said:
nikon or canon is never gonna make a drf, just accept that we are not their typical market audience. if they had an interest it would be on dealer's shelves already.
Click to expand...

I agree that a true drf from nikon or canon is a pipe dream, but an evf with a rangefinder lens mount could very easily kill two birds with one stone. How many G1 owners bought one just because it could use m mount lenses? If someone made an evf camera with the same lens flexibility, but with a proper sensor, I think it would sell like hotcakes. I would be one of the first in line for one, and this is coming from someone who would not buy an m8, an rd1, or a G1, for various reasons, mostly having to do with either sensors or price.

one other question about the evf: With my d-lux 3, the rear screen is utterly useless in low light. How does the evf on the g1 do in very low light?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom