There is already a first small $20 price drop on the brand new Panasonic GM1 at Uniquephoto (Click here).
And dpreview shared their first GM1 impression:
Panasonic clearly believes there’s a demand for an extremely small camera with a very large sensor and interchangeable lenses, and with the GM1 its engineers have pushed the definition of ‘pocketable enthusiast camera’ to new limits. The GM1 is cute, fast, and packs an impressive sensor inside its tiny frame. It’s quite a feat of engineering, and we can’t wait to start shooting with a production-quality sample.
GM1 preorder list:
In US at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto.
In Europe at Amazon Germany, Wex Germany, Amazon UK, Fotohanskeuzekamp, Cyberphoto Sweden and Wex UK.
One more deal: Two OPEN BOX Panasonic 20mm lenses for $297 at [shoplink 42779 ebay]Henrys (Click here)[/shoplink]. You save 100 bucks on that!
26 Responses
Olympus could have made something like this with in-built stabilization and the sensor of E-PM2, the best one so far. They would have had enormous commercial success. Olympus could have made a DSLR of the E series (E-550/E-650/E-50). They would have had great commercial success with it. Instead, they made E-M1, a DSLR-like body, a technical achievement in itself, but costing the earth. And its sensor, it turned out, has 10% lower ISO capacity than the E-PM2. E-M1 is ridiculously priced – especially now that FF Sony mirrorless is on the horizon at the same price. If Olympus do have commercial success with E-M1, it would be illogical and explained solely but human vanity.
This must be quite an interesting world you live in.
Considering the shutter panasonic had to develop to make the camera as small as it is, I sincerely doubt olympus could have made something this size with sensor IS. I think it’s a lovely little camera and will proudly have it next to my other olympus and panasonic bodies.
OMG 10%????!!!! really??!!
Thats copy to copy variation numbers. and have you seen the samples from the sonys? theyre crap, soft edges and corners and wides dont work. But I guess some people need the FF placebo effect…”the sensor is so big, so the quality is amazing. use my eyes to decide IQ? preposterous!”
jankoff – you are an idiot. I have the E-M1 and it is amazing and loaded with features. Great IQ, lightning fast AF, the legendary 5-axis IBIS, weather-sealed, and PDAF on the sensor. I have already tried it with my 43 lenses (14-54mm, 12-60, and 50-200mm SWD) and the AF is fast. Works as well as the E-5 with these lenses. This is a great pro camera and well worth the price. Some day you and others will realize that FF is not God’s gift to humanity. Far from it.
But you go ahead and buy the A7 (of course you won’t as you are a cheapskate) and I am sure you will enjoy no IBIS, overly expensive and large lenses, and that clickety-clack sewing machine shutter.
I said I do not disregard the technological achievements in E-M1 but I would be an idiot to buy something for 1600 euro (with standard kit lens) when a better thing in ISO, by far the most important parameter, costs 4 TIMES LESS, 420 euro (with standard kit lens). And I have fun when I hear that something simply good is called legendary and regarded with awe.
And nobody cared to comment on my criticism of Olympus for not making a DSLR with the technical innovations of E-M1. Be they legendary or simply borrowed from Sony or even straightforwardly banal, like weather sealing. Pentax have a weather sealed camera with a much better ISO (and not only) for 500 euro. No, I am not an idiot and I am NOT buying E-M1. I will be using my E-520 and E-600!
“when a better thing in ISO, by far the most important parameter, costs 4 TIMES LESS, 420 euro”
I seldom agree with True Homer, but he is totally right in this, 10% is so little it does not show in any realistic way, and may actually be a simple consequence of sample variation. If you use something as irrelevant as that to drive your argument, you obviously do not have the slightest idea what you are talking about.
Calling ISO performance THE most important parameter?
Uh.. oh yes, you indeed have absolutely no bloody clue.
The E-M1 has better IQ than E-PM2? It doesn’t. There was a detailed article re-printed here, in 43rumors, which clearly showed that E-M1, GX7 and E-M5 have THE SAME IQ. And I know from personal experience that there is no IQ difference between E-PM2 and E-M5. If the E-M1 cost twice less, it would have been a reasonable purchase. Buying the E-M1 for its current price is an act of vanity.
“The E-M1 has better IQ than E-PM2?”
And where exactly did I say that?
Oh wait, I didn’t.
All right, among the numerous contradictions with the Oly lineup and overall development, the ISO parameter is really important because Olympus historically (for a decade) had problems with noise levels (ISO). It is a pity to have a new machine with a decent sensor and to lose some of its ISO capacity because of the need to have compatibility with 43 glass (the most probable reason for the lower ISO result). They simply had to make a DSLR (or two DSLRs – one standard, one pro) and develop further the E-M5 and the PENS, and make even smaller cameras. As for now, there is a DSLR-like big, heavy and expensive thing which leaves you wondering whether you should use it for 43 glass or m43 glass. If you use it for 43 glass, why should it claim to operate m43 as well? When one can simply buy another much smaller and competent camera like the E-PM2 and carry the two around simultaneously? It would also be very nice to have a GM1-like Olympus. However, because of these circumstances, I am now happy with my three DSLRS for my 10 43 lenses – will use them in good light only. As for low light, the E-PM2 is a beast with the Leica 25mm and the Oly 45mm that I have (both).
My point: Oly should have developed the 43 and m43 separately. What will happen soon is they will launch a E-PM3 with a 43 compatibility, but with a tiny grip. The E-M1 has a good grip but is outrageously expensive. Why have Oly been having this inadequate behaviour for several years already?
“the ISO parameter is really important because Olympus historically (for a decade) had problems with noise levels (ISO).”
And this was clearly addressed with the E-M5 already. What matters is if its ISO performance is good enough for practical use, not if it is 10% better or worse then another camera. 10% is simply too little to be visible in real world situations, so it is a totally silly and irrelevant thing to argue about.
“It is a pity to have a new machine with a decent sensor and to lose some of its ISO capacity”
In real world terms you do not lose anything that can be noticed, so nonsense argument.
“because of the need to have compatibility with 43 glass (the most probable reason for the lower ISO result).”
Assumption, but you might be right in that one. Still totally irrelevant for real world use, only relevant to those who need re-confirmation of their choices based on the best test chart numbers. Sorry but this kind of thing doesn’t matter to photographers. If it were in the order of 50% it would start mattering somewhat, 100%? Now we are talking in the order of 1 stop, and getting to an area where it could certainly matter.
“They simply had to make a DSLR (or two DSLRs – one standard, one pro) and develop further the E-M5 and the PENS, and make even smaller cameras.”
Creating the E-M1 isn’t stopping them from further developing the PENs and the E-M5 at all, so that is a silly argument.
“As for now, there is a DSLR-like big, heavy and expensive thing which leaves you wondering whether you should use it for 43 glass or m43 glass.”
Do you own one?
No?
I thought so.
Did you try one?
Sorry but I do happen to own one, and despite it no longer being ‘coat pocket size’ really (which the E-M5 just is with a pancake lens), its still small and light, especially when compared with a DSLR of similar build quality, functionality and ESPECIALLY ergonomics.
That you don’t care about, or possibly don’t even understand the use of more buttons and dials, and how those take up some space or become unusable, that is fine, but maybe you should just stop making statements about things you don’t care for enough to actually bother understanding them?
“If you use it for 43 glass, why should it claim to operate m43 as well?”
Because it means I can use it with my nice 14-54mk2 and 75/1.8 for example?
Because the reduced flange distance allows adapting M mount Leica glass and many other lenses that can’t be adapted to 4/3 for example?
“When one can simply buy another much smaller and competent camera like the E-PM2 and carry the two around simultaneously?”
The E-PM2 is a very nice little camera for sure, but its handling doesn’t come anywhere near that of an E-M5, and that one doesn’t come anywhere near that of an E-M1. Not a problem for you maybe, and in a number of situations not a problem for me either. But there are certainly situations where the handling and especially lack of buttons and dials is a very big problem for me, and since it so happens those situations also pay for my photography hobby, I kinda consider them relevant. An E-PM2 would be able to serve as a 3rd camera there when for example mounted on a gorilla pod or such hanging from the ceiling, and with a remote control. No, it simply cannot do the job at all for the fast paced modification of settings and shooting that is very useful during events and concerts and such.
I certainly carry 2 cameras often, and both being able to use m4/3 lenses offers a lot more flexibility.
It doesn’t have to be your cup of tea, that is totally fine, and if you aren’t looking for such a camera, also totally fine, but maybe before you start making all kinds of arguments, you should look a tiny little bit beyond your own use, and actually try to understand why different situations result in different choices, and how such choices might actually be just as valid as the one you’d make for your own situation.
Does the E-M1 impede your E-PM2? Did it stop Olympus from producing the E-PM2? Is it stopping Olympus from producing an E-PM3 in due time?
No, no and no
Hence your argument is just totally absurd.
Thank you for the long answer but it does not address the biggest issue, relevant for years already: why did they not make a DSLR? It was – and is still – easy. And they refuse(d) to do it. I have many 43 lenses and despite this and because of the Olympus obstinacy I will probably have to migrate – be it Pentax or FF Sony. I see no reason to buy a E-M1 for 1500 euro and not to buy a Pentax, superior in ALL areas (see DXoMark), for 500 euro. I do tourist photographer as a hobby and I normally carry either 2 or 3 DSLRs with different lenses plus the E-PM2 with the Leica 25mm. I hoped to change one E camera with the 12-60 with the E-M1. But they let me – and many others – down. They offered an extremely expensive product with a low – in today’s standards – sensor potential. Pity!
But if they made a DSLR, it would have been an E-7, which would still come with a $1500-1700 price-tag, I do not see how that would have addressed your problem really.
Instead, Olympus should consider there are still a fair number of E-620 and similar camera users that do want an upgrade that can make proper use of their 4/3 lenses including good AF, and provide something for that market. That could be a more simple and cheaper camera, could be micro 4/3 or 4/3, but it does have to be a real replacement for that E-620 functionally. The E-M1 is not that camera.
Why no DSLR? because Olympus decided a long time ago already they want to migrate away from DSLRs as soon as technically feasible. If we like it or not, this has been clear from the day they introduced the E-P1, and has been reflected in their statements over and over. The ONLY reason why they didn’t do so immediately is because technology wasn’t ready for it yet.
But continuing with a hybrid camera as soon as they could is really the right thing to do, as it provides you as a user with a real upgrade-path instead of just postponing that upgrade as a pure DSLR solution would.
As with regards to the sensor, I’m sorry but when I can shoot at ISO 3200 without much work in PP and have a pretty good ISO 1600, and can combine that with the whole slew of fast primes that exist, that sensor has a lot of potential. Please remember the sensor is only one part of the chain, and no, its not the most important one, its merely one of the important ones next to optics and processing.
Also, keep in mind that you won’t have a camera + real replacement of that 12-60 in reach and optical quality for $500, so you’ll be winning a bit on the sensor, at the cost of the quality of optics.
Since posting their GM1 preview earlier DPR have published pictures from same which many viewers on DPR said were at least equal to or slightly better than those taken with EM1, EM5, GH3, or GX7. Perhaps the new compact 12-32mm lens with its very high IQ has something to do with this? Many think that Leica is about to launch their version of same camera with their new 17mm/f1.7 lens?
Small but relevant correction – the Leica-branded wide will be 15mm FL.
I am really hoping that a little EVF-eqipped GM is in the works.
Yes a GM2 with EVF and hotshoe like that shown on Pany’s patent would also be my choice. This model would still be very small (as uses a lower height 19:7 screen) only a little higher body to accomodate the EVF. Pany is not offering a white model for GX7 and this color is very popular in Asia so hopefully this is in the works for a GM2 with EVF?
It sure looks like an impressive little camera, that’s for sure.
From what I’ve seen, Panasonic is selling a cream colored GM1 model in Asia. I kind of like the orange one… so does my girlfriend… an important buying consideration. 😉
Too bad there’s no port for the LVF2. GM2?
I’ll buy that little orange leather covered beauty if they ever become available there I shop.
i guess none ,you must look this cam like gadget ,small and secret and panny will release tiny lens in future
if you want that see new patents lumix center EVF and smaller than GX7 😉
A GM1 with a hotshoe and EVF, I thought we had one of those already…. it is called the GX7!
A GM2 with EVF and hotshoe would still be 30% smaller than the GX7 which is pitted against stiff mid sized rangefinder style camera competition from Fuji, Samsung, and Sony. Those wanting more features like swing EVF, larger mechanical shutter capability, more controls, will opt for the GX7 and those liking the significantly smaller GM model with small primes or kit lens will be attracted to that gem.
As a happy GX7 owner I’m tempted anyway. X-mass present for my girlfriend looks like a good excuse.
who cares what the amazon owned corrupted camera site says about any camera, DPR after amazon bought it too conservative and DPR never criticize any camera since then.
so it is not worth reading that site any more, even their fora are so boring now.
I read somewhere that the flash sync is 1/50??!
Some samples with the GM1 + 12-32 (Salon de la Photo /Paris)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/fabrys/10764754366/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/fabrys/10764838036/
Very good at 3200 iso
Saw it at the Paris Photo Expo too, the built quality of the camera body is very good (except maybe for the flash assembly which was no entirely flush with the body on the site).
But what really amazed me was the build quality of the 12-32 lens, it is quite exceptional. It feels very solid even when extending, this is way above typical kit lens quality, it really felt on par with the Pro MFT lenses from Olympus.