DxOmark (Click here) tested the GM1 Image Quality and the small surprise is that the GM1 delivers not the exact same performance of the GX7. DxO writes:
While it’s slightly disappointing that the sensor in the GM1 can’t match that of the GX7, the former is a few bucks south of $1000 body only. Nevertheless it has competitive image quality in a genuinely small package and the usefulness of the high-speed shutter shouldn’t be overlooked. Paired with the new zoom or the 20mm f1.7 pancake, the GM1 should prove popular as a walkabout.
Imaging Resource (Click here) posted the first part of their ongoing GM1 review. There is a very interesting part concerning the innovative shutter that occupies 80% less volume than that of the GX7! They also compared the IQ with these of other cameras and for now the reviewer quite likes the camera:
The GM1 feels strong, light and sturdy, and the compact 12-32mm makes it a go-anywhere camera. The autofocus system on the GM1 was brought over from the GX7, and it’s quite impressive.
These four point difference with the GX7 really shouldn’t worry anyone. With the GM1 you get a unique camera that you can truly carry with you anywhere.
GM1 preorder list:
In US at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto.
In Europe at Amazon Germany, Wex Germany, Amazon UK, Fotohanskeuzekamp, Cyberphoto Sweden and Wex UK.
91 Responses
Never seen these to be far off reality and it is sobering during periods of hype.
Yeah, but the black one does better. 🙂
http://www.getolympus.com/us/en/lens_promotion?utm_content=lens_promotion&utm_campaign=stackablelens_p&utm_source=email_etprm&utm_medium=email
So not happy about this, now they are offering instant rebates and $200 off of 75mm lens. WTF! I hope these savings come to Amazon.
This is much better & make sense .
The GX7 still retain it’s premier status in Lumix line up .
The GM1 already to it’s very best consider it’s size & beautiful look .
I never seen a Lumix camera this big before or one that shoots tethered. Full frame? http://youtu.be/JiIbVCSCbIA
Sorry to go off topic
It’s the GH2 🙂
No it is much bigger and thicker than the GH2, it looks like a DSLR from the side, even the GH3 would be thinner.
Nope. I already checked this video yesterday. it’s perfectly the GH2. Just view the video in maximum size to recognize it. See the screenshot form the video:
http://i1266.photobucket.com/albums/jj524/picrumors/picrumors001/Bildschirmfoto2013-12-06um193714_zps05466e1e.png
and this is another GH2 pic:
http://www.google.be/imgres?client=firefox-a&hs=WVM&sa=X&rls=org.mozilla:de:official&biw=1920&bih=1066&tbm=isch&tbnid=o6c_rO7SPtdNDM:&imgrefurl=http://www.ephotozine.com/article/panasonic-lumix-gh2-micro-43rds-expert-review-16148&docid=OaMIJEu03IKnsM&imgurl=http://www.ephotozine.com/articles/panasonic-lumix-gh2-digital-slr-expert-review-16148/images/panasonic-lumix-gh2-side-view.jpg&w=666&h=493&ei=yxiiUu7hPInPsgaquYGIBw&zoom=1&ved=1t:3588,r:5,s:0,i:96&iact=rc&page=1&tbnh=186&tbnw=253&start=0&ndsp=35&tx=102&ty=87
It also has the 100-300mm lens attached on it. Not certainly a FF lens 🙂
It still looks fake!
http://www.letsgodigital.org/images/artikelen/38/panasonic-100-300mm.jpg
The apect ratio from the lens an the camera is different
also the label from the 100-300mm would be on top not on the side.
Shit, I was hopping it would be on par with E-M5 but sensor lags…
I just ordered an E-PL6 from Hong Kong, which will end up costin me about $459 after I sell the kit lens….DxO rates that higher than the GM1 & the GX7, too. (actually they rate the E-PL5…same thing as E-PL6, tho)… I don”t put any stock in DxO, really. They are all over the place with their scores.
Actually…I just checked the DxO site…they rate the sensor in the E-PL 5 better than the OMD-EM5. None of it makes ANY sense. LOL!
The differences are marginal between the Olympus models. They are within the one third of a stop error tolerance of DXO testing.
Throw in manufacturing variations and minor tweaks to the processing pipeline between different models as well and you get your differences.
It’s the same reason some people get stuck or hot pixels on their sensors.
I suspect if DXO tested half a dozen of each model they would get a spread of scores from each.
Roger Cicala @ Lens Rentals tests multiple copies of lenses for all of his lens graphs…if he doesn’t …he states that fact and why. He has a lot of credibility. DxO is in the business of testing lenses and cameras and publishing the results….Let’s hope that they are always testing multiple copies of everything….
dxo is generally not testing multiple copies, but may do so when they get really odd results.
I don’t get it. The GX7 and the GM1 are supposed to have the same sensor and processor. The EM5, PL5, PM2, P5 are also supposed to have the same sensor and processor, yet, again, they get different DXOmark scores. Either they are not exactly the same, or there are other parameters than sensor/processor influencing the score, or there is wide sample variation, or the testing method is not reliable. Any ideas?
> Any ideas?
DxO mark is simply a load of bull.
I think the differrences are there because of the base ISO, being 125 on the GX7 and 200 on the GM1. The lowest ISO the camera can reach the higher the dynamic range (and color depth, etc.) is when using the same sensors.
ISO 125 on GX7 is “extended”, clearly marking ISO 200 as the base ISO.
I don’t know why you would say it is the same sensor, it clearly looks bigger in the images they have shown, take a look. How can it be the same?
you serious?
It’s definately not a full frame sensor, even though the photograph does look like the new Sony ones. I think it is APCS and it take mircro four third lenses, pretty cool.
The GM1 numbers seem to indicate a tweaked G6/GH2 sensor with better processing.
DPR studio test scene identifies GM1’s sensor uniquely as the very same GX7’s sensor with slightly tweaked processing, resulting in a tad bit higher sharpness. Without pixel peeping, you can’t tell them apart.
Whilst GH2 and G6 sensors also have different and unique noise patterns. GF6 is very similar to G6, but with lower resolution.
IOW, you can easily tell them all four apart.
All what this tells, is that DxO’s tweaking of the test to make the results less laughable/closer to reality still fails.
No. The sensor in the GN1 is certainly not the oversized one grm the GH / G6.
Once again DXO proves that they’re full of cr@p. I can already see from a mile away the DXO-Trolls running to defend their holy grail and cr@p over m43, but let me be clear, when I criticize DXO I do so in defense of all camera gear, not just m43. DXO is the cancer that the creativity and fulldilment of photography, it feeds the pathologically obsessed non-photographer geeks that need some sort of validation in order to go out and be seen with their gear instead of using it and learning its in & outs. I can understand sample variation and other issues but this isn’t the first time they fail at comparing cameras with the same sensor architecture. I don’t understand why DXO results keep getting posted here and why people put so much value on them. DXO makes nice software but that’s it, they’re as corrupting as [INSERT ANY OTHER TECHNOLOGICALLY OBSESSED HOBBY HERE] benchmarks are to [INSERT JOYFUL/CREATIVE ACTIVITY HERE], numbers (unreliable at that) don’t make up photography.
Yes, the internet definition of a ‘troll’ is anyone that disagrees with you.
Can’t you use another catch phrase at least once ? You always use the same tired, dull and repetitive answers without even reading the post. Oh, and btw…those who disagree with me would be who exactly ? Who are these blessed glorious souls ? Going by my post those who disagree with me would be defending the position that photography should relegate itself as a purely technological driven consumerist obsession instead of a healty, enjoyable and rewarding activity. Are you saying we should stop taking photographs and just collect cameras as decorative pieces with a spec sheet attached to them as mere anecdote ? GO READ MY POST AGAIN!
So why should DXO be praised as the ¨be all, end all¨ og photography judgement ? Does it improve your photography or the enjoyment you get from it ? Do you work for DXO ? do they pay you ? No ? then don’t go defending them without even reading my post like some illiterate child.
DXO is just a benchmark company, nothing less nothing more, there are gazilion other companies/sites like them, they’re just another source for data comparison among many other and even then that very same ¨important¨ data is just that…data, an anecdote in the state of current technology and industry trends, it doesn’t affect or change the nature of photography one bit. So yeah, I stand by my initial post, your precious DXO is full of it, not just in regards to m43 but also Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Sony, Leica, hasselblad, Ricoh, Sigma, etc, etc…DXO and the many other ¨scientific¨ data collectors are a distraction from the true nature of photography and have corrupted the minds of many photograpers into thinking they should have the latest and greatest without any regards to the reality of their goals and accomplishments.
SO yeah, every time a DXO post appears I’ll come here to remind everyone that they should be out enjoying photography instead of wanking to benchmark scores. Meanwhile you can take your DXO fanboyism and frame it so your family can feel proud, cheers.
100% agree with you, AMVR. It’s like cyclists who obsess about every gram on their 14 lb carbon fiber bike, ignoring the 10 lbs of spare tire they’re carrying on their bellies.
The camera isn’t the limiting factor when it comes to good photography…
And yet people on here were getting excited the other day because the Canon APSC sensor was slightly lower scoring than the latest Panny and Olympus/Sony one.
Now all these people are saying that they never believe in DXO when the GM1 scores less well.
Anyway imo DXO are good at testing sensors with a consistent and logical methodology but I don’t like their lens testing.
Whether the better scoring sensors will make any difference to your (or anyone else’s) photography is debateable.
To me it’s like knowing horse power of your car.
Will it make a difference to your driving and will having more power get you home quicker ? Depends on a lot of factors but for most people the answer is probably no.
IMO those people are just as foolish as the APS-C/FF trolls that flood this site. Regardless of how good m43 performs vs canon the point still remains valid, using DXO data to somehow validate your lack of passion and commitment to photography is pathetic and depressing to say the least. DXO (and any of other countless benchmarks) is a distraction that takes away from the photographic experience regardless of any sort of ¨validation¨ it may deliver.
I so agree. The word “brainwashed” springs to mind, whenever I read “DXO”.
If DxO got it wrong, don’t know where they are getting their data to make such excellent results in RAW conversion and lens correction. It is simply outstanding, and that is someone who has not been a fan of their previous DxO Optics. Version 9 is a huge improvement, so I am happy to give them some credence as a result.
Isn’t it weird that the numbers are so off? I mean, up until now, we all thought that it was the same engine and the same sensor as the GX7, but is it possible that it’s not? It’s within the margin of difference between the E-M1, E-M5 and GH3 but even so, I’m a bit surprised by it.
I’ve shot GH-3, GX-7, GM-1, EM5, still own the GH-3 and GM-1. Frankly there isn’t a lot of difference between shots on any of them. The Oly will default to a colder auto WB but noise isn’t hugely different. I’m sure people could measure slight variations but under actual use conditions I’m betting that most people couldn’t pick the differences out. It really comes down to form factor and ergonomics, and those are NOT universal. Fwiw the GH-3 is the best of the bunch *for me* wrt ergos. The GM1 is nice because it gives me a relatively large sensor in a very small form factor. Essentially RX100 size without the Sony UI (which I don’t care for).
The tech is, for most intents and purposes, roughly equivalent. The choice really comes down to form factor and end use. Ymmv.
If we take that result seriously, and add the fact that the sensors are identical (as proved by studio scene shots), then:
70 – 66 = 4
4 / 66 = 6%
DxO mark has at least 6% margin of error. LOL.
Most disturbingly, the difference in the dynamic range, which is in logarithmic scale. The difference of 0.5 on logarithmic scale means half stop difference. In a photographic benchmark to miss by a half stop is….
Basically, that is a nice proof that all that moaning about DxO numbers, the flames about minuscule differences, are really for nothing. It’s the purest internet trolling on part of the DxO labs.
Good point, Dummy. Some people do not seem to realize that you will get a little different result every time you measure on the exact same sensor/camera. Furthermore, the figures will differ a bit with individual sensors of the same kind. I guess the 6% you mention is within the “margins of statistically non safe measures.”
The GM-1 is a great cam, no matter what DxO says.
You don’t understand, do you? It really matters what Dxomark says since the score is actually the benchmark and reference for today digital sensors.
What DXomark does is that they explores the truth inside each camera.
As long as you also care about:
– the qualifying statements dxo makes about how they test
– standards for proper testing
When you do, you’ll immediately notice that dxo does not account for sample variation or error margins, resulting in some level of variation between results that do not represent typical differences between the tested products.
When you understand how to read their results and put in the effort to properly interpret the results, please care about dxo as it can give very useful information in that case, but when you take their numbers, especially the overall scores, at face value, then you are much better off just ignoring them, as you will certainly arrive at unfounded and outright wrong conclusions.
You guys are full of it. Look at the high ISO numbers, its on par with the GH2/G6 numbers. This is not the GX7 sensor. Still better off getting a EPM2 if you want pure sensor performance in a small package.
…or get an E-PL6 and put a VF4 in your other pocket and actually be able to compose images! 🙂
If you look at the comparison images of the GM1 and GX7 on imaging-resource at ISO 3200, they look pretty much identical.
Noise level is the same on GM1 and GX7 but at DR the GM1 is 0.5 to 1 stop behind. Not sure why but could be
– due to electronic first curtain
– due to active stepper motor while recording the image
– due to less shielding due to size restrictions
– due to electronics working at higher temperature
Is there any DXO test comparing eectronic vs. mechanical shutter for GX7?
The electronic first curtain could very well explain this. Without the brief dark period, the sensor is probably suffering from a small bit of blooming, and perhaps running slightly hotter at the moment of exposure. The tiny body may exacerbate any heat issues, too. It would be interesting if someone with the DXO software could test the GX7 using both the normal shutter and the e-shutter.
Its a smaller body so it must get a smaller score. Sounds like dox (ocd, dxo whatever they are) again.
Counter example, E-PM2 versus E-M5.
Nope, doesn’t seem to work like that Jim.
From the same stable. It don’t count.
Hmm?
Small vs large lumix m43 body
Small vs large olympus m43 body
Why would the first be ‘from the sa,e stable’ but the later not? Coz one is a pen and the other an om-d? Well in that case, the same thing is true for the lumix ones, gx vs gm line.
Bad results. Sensor performance gets worse, not better with new models. Same with Sony. See A7 (not R) results: not better or worse than two year old FX cameras. Only Nikon and Pentax seem to know how to improve sensor performance with new models. Sensor is the most expensive part of a camera. Paying high price for recycled tech that performs worse is disappointing.
The solution is simple, STOP READING DXOMARK! their results NEVER agree with real life results.
what about fuji?
what about fuji? tell us!!
We shouldn’t be too fussed that the GM1 sensor’s IQ is not quite up there with the GX7. The overall performance is amazing for such a tiny compact hybrid ILC (see Andrew’s review @ EOSHD.com). I always used to pack a Rollei 35 for its availability anywhere. The GM1 is a little gem which will serve the same purpose. I got mine last week, and I have seen them in the stores, so there should be good availability for Christmas. Get one for your spouse/partner or even for yourself. You won’t regret it.
There is nothing else out there which does such a great job (stills & video) in such a tiny package.
sony a7 overral score 90 🙂
the other day u said m43ers only think in numbers
btw, you don’t miss a single post here! This is pathetic!
nothing really interesting on your blogs/sites??
no im frustrated M43 user after buying many cameras leave almost broke that have to sell my body in the streets …panasonic destroy my life 😮
so you should have taken some photography classes.. the problem is with you, not the equipment… let me see so you bought the first pany, then the second.. the third, fourth, etc etc… and then some day you realized it is a good system…. Lol… you are not that smart… lol
…. NOT a good system, I meant.
(now you can come w/ another joke!)
Thanks for the personal profiling
Shame about the A7 noise levels though, even at low ISO… what did they do wrong?
yes lets the worldcup how many m43 in the field …….43 duckface pro hipstagram (Y)
Roger Cicala’s paper on how different the measurements are at DxO and at CIPA, and what they really measure should be made compulsory reading before we lose our time on these things:
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/10/there-is-no-perfect-lens-test-either
In this case DxO might simply have measured sample variation, on how many do they perform the measure, please^
As Roger notices, DxO doesn’t measure astigmatism on lenses. Which part of the filed curvature do they measure: the center or the corners? And so on and so forth.
As noted above it is only who have no art or talent that hold desperately to the the belief of absolute measurement, but it is just an illusion.
M- Thein too remarked that the more expensive your equipment is the more you risk to be hindered by it psychologically when you are a newbie.
And that’s exactly what we are plagued by: a mass of newbies and/or old geezers who were never able to show any talent despite the thousands spent, in the belief that they would climb the pecking order nevertheless.
The f/0.95 guys – LOL.
didn’t get your last sentence… so everyone who buys an f0.95 lens is an idiot? There is no porpuse for them?
Yes. what do you do with the 0.95? Wipe the floors at night?
Show us your piccies instead! No 0.95 guy ever does…
Hrm, iirc mr reese for example has shown more then a few pics taken with his Voigtlander f/0.95 lenses.
What I wonder about Amalric, why can’t you make a point (and you are having a pretty good point in the first part of your post) without making some totally absurd and intentionally insulting comment about entire groups of people?
Lol….. is that your argument? Really? Wipe your butt before talk about something you know nothing. Yes I have the f0.95 nokton trio and they are absolutely amazing. Ok, a bit soft (still usable) wide open, but very sharp f1.2, ultra-shap 1.4, 1.8, 2…… And being all manual, de-clicked aperture… simply a dream for my video work and casual photography. F0.95 comes as a bonus, as we don’t have the option without it, and it was not the deciding factor on purchase, but the whole concept. Your original comment has a point, eventually, but the last sentence was simply ridiculous and biased.
Why so angry?
What, you can’t conceive of ever wanting to shoot with…
Fast lenses?
Manual lenses?
High-quality lenses?
All of the above?
None of the above?
Why do you resent people who may want to, can and do?
Get a grip.
And check this out, it may help with your… issues.
http://www.hairclub.com/
Show your candlelight piccies, 0.95 lamer, LOL!
Sour grapes?
Or just plain rotten…
Good grief almanac, sometimes you sound like you really have it all together photographically, then … this ? I wouldn’t shoot with a 0.95, but what is wrong with it?
???
I am surprised. Didn’t realize how far behind the Panasonic sensors still are.
These DxO scores are inferior to that of the D90 announced in 2008!
Yes, first the fail as photographers, then they have a second life as trolls, with miserable nicks…
you seem that u are so pro can isee your pics?
You may want to click on his name to get to his flickr stream and see his pictures. I don’t recommend doing so, but if you insist on wanting to see his pictures, you could have done so without the need to ask, and you could have figured that out without much effort or thought. Evidently, full frame doesn’t have a full brain.
At least I would recommend wannabe FFramers to do what many p/phy teachers still teach, and that is start with a real 35mm a film one, and learn the hard way how much it costs having everything in focus.
Doing so with no possibility of going above 400 ISO, 800 at the most teaches a lot of things, especially when one had f/1.8 lenses at the max, and you had to figure the right exposure.
Oh yes, and then a lesson about keeping the FF steady, LOL!
Sorry Dude,
You sound quite unhappy. I’m just drawing attention to some facts.
Failed photographer? Hahahaha. Luv your jokes.
and superior to all recent canon apsc cameras… surprising!
You should compare with best of breed, not the worst.
By your standard, Nikon One sensor is amazing because it is as good as GF6 (bigger sensor).
superior to my iphone 3?
…. definetely
66 score !
First, I just cannot stop laughing. Second, I’m glad that I don’t buy it yet. my Samsung phone may be on par with GM1!!!!
I can imagine your photographic skills….
GM1 scores worse than Sony RX100 MkII with smaller 1″ type sensor? RX100 MkII has better DR, color, just slightly worse in low light. m43 was meant to be killing the world in sensors.
Just to stay ‘on the money’ R. Cicala of Lensrentals notes that Sites like DxO have to chose between measuring resolution either at the center or at the edges. If they do the first m4/3 would come worst than APS.
DxO doesn’t measure astigmatism either.
He also notes that distance of measurement of the targets might be v. critical for WA.
I think that people are entitled to suspect that DxO might favour some brands to the detriment of others.
Finally we don’t know how many samples they test. If they test one only the result might be totally random.
It is really funny to see how people react the test results of a product they use. It is understandable that people try to defend their investment, not only among m4/3 users. Once dxomark, or other websites, release positive test results, we all praise our products and our decision. However, whenever the test results become bad or unsatisfing, we turn back to attack those testers how unreliable the results are. This is the nature of users in every industry. People have ego and are not brave enough to face the truth that every product are not necessary to be good. Some are nice. Some are very mediocre.
“People have ego and are not brave enough to face the truth that every product are not necessary to be good. Some are nice. Some are very mediocre.”
This, in the real world, may be correct and an appropriate statement.
However the tests done by this organisation mean nothing. They are biased to size and do not do lens tests correctly. Lenses that are known to be excellent often get mediocre results. Real life experience does not support the test results.
The results obtained by photographers (professionals and well experienced enthusiasts) do not follow the “scores” given by DXO.
People do not carry a test environment around with them when taking photos. This makes the process as used by DXO suspect and mostly irrelevant to real world use.
The real test of a camera is if it does what is required. Making charts to hang on a wall in place of photographs is not photography.
The sensor tests more like G6 than GX7.