A GF3 fac simile. Not the real camera!
In mid June Panasonic will announce the new GF3 which will be an ultra small camera that will replace the current [shoplink 17361]Panasonic GF2[/shoplink]. That’s a huge surprise if you do consider the GF2 is only eight months old! But it’s also not a surprise if you see the success of Sony’s NEX cameras which are as small as the current GF2 but do use a larger APS-C sensor. And the upcoming Sony NEX-C3 will be even smaller (Click here to see the NEX-C3 versus GF2 size comparison). So after the Megapixel and the High-ISO war Sony and Panasonic started a new kind of competition….the miniaturization battle!
To compete against the upcoming NEX-C3 the new Panasonic GF3 will be around 10-15% less high, less wide, less thick than the current GF2. I have been told it has about the same size of the current Panasonic TZ cameras ([shoplink 22338 ebay]Click here to see them on eBay[/shoplink]). De facto the mount ring is higher than the camera itself! And to make it that small Panasonic removed some of the GF2 buttons and also the hot shoe is no more present! Some of my sources told us that this is the first camera that easily fits in any pocket when the [shoplink 16258]14mm pancake[/shoplink] is attached. It feels like a real compact camera! A new source told us the GF3 has the same G3 sensor and specs (and that’s good news!). That means it has the new 16 Megapixel sensor FullHD recording.
And here is what Steve Jobs would call the …one more thing surprise:
The fact that the GF is going to be smaller and smaller doesn’t mean that we don’t want to see a GF model with more advanced manual controls. Three sources confirmed that we should expect a second GF model to be announced within the second half of the year. It’s aimed for semi-pro photographers. That’s all I know for now, but it’s enough to make me dream the Micro Four Thirds L1 might be coming for real ([shoplink 22740 ebay]Click here to see that amazing camera on eBay[/shoplink])!
I am constantly working to provide you with FT5 rumors about Olympus and Panasonic. Lots of stuff is coming! Stay tuned! Don’t miss any rumors: Join us on Facebook and Twitter! Subscribe our RSS feed!
Links to the cameras discussed in that article:
The current GF2 camera at [shopcountry 17361]. P.S.: You can get the Panasonic GF2 with 14-42mm lens for $499 only at Adorama (Click here) and BHphoto (Click here).
The current Sony NEX cameras at [shopcountry 20638].
The Panasonic L1 Four Thirds camera at [shopcountry 20740].
The Panasonic TZ compact cameras at [shopcountry 22338].
[poll id=”61″]
Reminder -> Rumors classification explained (FT= FourThirds):
FT1=1-20% chance the rumor is correct
FT2=21-40% chance the rumor is correct
FT3=41-60% chance the rumor is correct
FT4=61-80% chance the rumor is correct
FT5=81-99% chance the rumor is correct
153 Responses
Why not just build the sensor right into the lens barrel and cut the touchy-feeley-screeny…
You mean like a Ricoh GXR? ;~)
The semi-pro GF is by far the most interesting bit of this rumor, especially if it’s flagged FT5 as well.
Yes! 🙂
At least we have some choice now.
I hope there will be Olympus rumors as well. First vendor to offer a serious m43 camera in small (non-SLR) format with built-in EVF will make a sale to me this year. I hope it’s going to be Olympus (as I want built-in IS) but if Olympus does not deliver, I will gladly look at what Panasonic is offering.
Yes there will be soon Olympus FT5 rumors! It’s very complicated with Olympus becuase there will be more than one new PEN camera in June! And I have to sort out which rumor is for which camera 🙂
Admin,
Please just tell us what you have. June is approaching.
Just wait a bit. I am really trying to get as free time as possible from my job to have more time to contact sources and write rumors. You will NOT have to wait a long time. Promised!
Thank you.
oh dear
i wanted to preoder the G3, but now i cant wait for June. I really hope Olys on the way for a PEN with EVF.
Same here. Anyway it’s always cool to have choice, if Oly fails to launch its Pro Pen, knowing that Pany has something in the pipe is great (it’s FT5 after all).
Now I should start saving money :$
“If Oly fails to launch its Pro Pen, knowing that Pany has something in the pipe is great”
That’s the advantage of a cross-mfr standard. Sweet.
That’s one of the advantages for adopting an open-source system, which marketed by Olympus in the original E-system and E-1.
Or else you have to pray hard and hope that the marketing department of Canikon will listen to your prayers.
If there is no hotshoe, does that mean that you can’t use flash with it?
A smaller model seems interesting, but I think the weight of the Ep2 bothers me more than the size, and the lack of stabilization makes me sceptical about panasonic cameras.
No hot-shoe means no external EVF?
My guess was right!!! I knew it they gonna make it smaller. GF will never have build in VF or pro dials. Just have to hope that E-P3 or NEX7 will have EVF with them.
What can I say…
Copy the worst design ever (NEX) and cripple it a bit further. What you get is an expensive gadget, not a camera. Just as well the lenses are decent.
I’m not sure about the global perspective and cultural differences, but based on what I can observe in my region (i.e. Hong Kong), people buying the Panasonic GF and Olympus E-PL series are mainly people without in-depth knowledge of what they want for their “good” camera. They just want a camera which claim to take better photo than high-grade point-and-shoot (e.g. Canon G12, Panasonic LX5, Olympus XZ-1) with similar weight and size. To this group of people, comparison by numbers will be more convincing. Say, higher sensor pixel count, a display with higher resolution, lighter, smaller.
I just hope that Olympus will did it right for the coming Pen line-up, say, Pen Mini will sacrifice nearly everything for small and light, E-PL3 will preserve the flash and hot-shoe, and a Pen Pro (may be E-P3) truly aims for people who need a mirrorless body to replace/substitute their existing DSLR system.
Why is it not a camera? Of course there are compromises when going small, but what makes the desing such that this is a significantly poorer camera than for instance GF2?
May be the rumored Olympus Mini Pen and GF3 targeted at the same market segment, a pocket-able DSLR similar to the days of Olympus E-620. But based on the tradition of no in-body IS and image processing of Panasonic bodies, Mini Pen will be more attractive if Olympus did it right (i.e. E-5 picture quality in pocket-able package).
It HAS to have IBIS to be attractive. Even 1.5-stop.
BTW, E-PL2 is not far off E-5 in terms of image quality.
Totally agree
“It HAS to have IBIS to be attractive.”
+1
Yeah the PEN mini with IBIS and good quality jpegs would be very attractive as a 2nd body with something like the 20/1.7. I’d have to give something like that some serious consideration as a pocketable 2nd body along with maybe a E-P3 with a built-in EVF for more general useage.
sneye,
You and I might not like this development (ultra-pocketable m43), but that’s the way to go. For m43 to succeed in the long term a sizeable market must be built, and NEX must be contained, NOW, asap. We (a niche in terms of potential users) can always wait a few more months for the semi-pro model. I know, we’ve been waiting for a while.. 🙂
Yes, we can wait, but I’m not sure Olympus and Panasonic have that much time before NEX gets decent glass. IMO the next six months are going to determine which system dominates the mirrorless segment.
I’d actually be interested in one of these ‘ultra-pocketable m4/3’ models as a 2nd body. With my 20/1.7, it would be stealthy enough to be great for low-light situations at night on the street or indoors. It would be much more capable in low light than a XZ1 or LX5 and just as small.
That’s also what I want, but I’m willing to compromise some size and weight for optical quality with the coming up Olympus HG/SHG m43 prime.
I’ve tried to mount a 14-35 on a E-PL2, it shoots flawlessly but with one big issue, you will never find a suitable way to grip the system with comfort.
Yes. I keep looking at the LX5, but as a second camera if there were something smaller than a GF2 or EPL2 that I could use my 20mm on I might bite.
I seem to be more interested in using manual lenses with my GH2 lately. The 20mm I’m using as a no-fuss lens when going full-manual isn’t the best option. Popping it onto a dinky body could be a good solution.
+1
What the visitors of this forum tend to ignore/forget is that we are a small niche, responsible for only a fraction of the sales Panasonic and Olympus make with m43.
However, I’d still like a decent Olympus body, as small as a PEN, IBIS and an integrated EVF good enough to manually focus with my Voigtlaender 25mm and my Minolta MD/MC glass.
+1 to Tobias
“Pro” gf series? We have already seen that kind of camera before the GF1. It’s name is E-P1.
What is exactly your point, beyond Panasonic bashing?
For those in the running for a very competent compact, or a proper pocketable second body, I’d say this is ideal. But won’t this model be fishing in the same pond as the LX5? I mean, who needs an LX if you can get something as versatile as this for just a little more cash?
That’s the big question that Canon can’t answer. They won’t want to sabotage their own G series, so they are scared to enter the CSC world.
Panasonic & Olympus seem happy to let the market decide which format will win, which is sensible.
Still, the LX5 has a faster lens than the kit lens on most m43 cams (helping deliver “some” bokeh), bigger focal length range, and is fairly slim.
Removing hot shoe is wrong. Removing buttons is wrong. I suppose they’ll get rid of the built-in flash as well. I know this will sell well and popularize the system, but they should have just made the LCD smaller and left all the commands/connectors as they were on the GF2.
Just wonder why modern design of mirrorless need to stick with such rectangular shape. It may be interesting and able to have both internal flash and hotshoe if they redesign the whole concept by thinking more, er… 3-dimensional
Say, a cube-like body, similar to a miniaturized medium-format body, which can put a screen on the back, buttons on the left and top, a small DV-like grip on the right and battery bay door at the bottom.
Yes, or something like the old Nikon CoolPix 4500 with the pivoting body. Though with a 3″ LCD on one side and the lens mount on the other, it wouldn’t be very small width-wise. The body of the 4500 is about the same dimension as the GH2, sans grip and EVF.
I had 4 cameras in that series (900, 950, 990 & 4500) and absolutely loved the many angles I could use for composing and shooting. It was great for street photography held at waist level. And for macro shooting at ground level. Too bad it lost popularity. Probably because it didn’t “look like a camera” to many.
To each his/her own I suppose. I absolutely hate pivoting body cameras. I chose the Canon G2 over that Coolpix line specifically for that reason. I just think a rotating screen is the better route to take. If anything a hinged screen is even more versatile since it allows you to shoot around corners without being noticed. Where as the pivoting body only moves up/down. Cameras with rotating screens also feel much more solid to me.
“facsimile” doesn’t have a space in it. I wouldn’t normally correct spelling, but I really appreciate the site.
Evidently there is a market for tiny cameras with big sensors like this. I just imagine that most such people aren’t the sort to be following incremental developments on rumour sites. While this camera doesn’t interest me, if it sells well to other consumers and boosts the entire profile of m43 in the long run, that’s good news. We’ve seen Panasonic release the GH-2 and some awesome lenses, so I think it’s safe to say they are building their products for different market segments. We’ve just gotta wait for the one we’re looking for :).
up until now only Fuji know what kind of camera photographers want… but they F it up with the software… I wish Canon or Nikon come out and show them who’s the boss!
Seems Big-Two don’t really have interest to join such a battle. Remember FourThirds is a system designed bottom-up for the digital era and with lenses specially engineered to the need of digital camera systems. In contrast to Canikon, which is in fact digitalized-film-cameras. Not so sure if market leaders are willing give up their R&D for more than 30 years and start it all over again (like the days of Canon moving to EF lenses).
There will always be a new product line. I believe the dslr lenses will getting smaller in the future.
there are 2 rumors in this post: the mini-GF and the pro GF. so if you dont like the mini-GF, then get the pro one. why are you guys still complaining? LOL!
I don’t think there will be PRO-GF because if they do how are they going to sell G3 and GH?
it will depend on the pricing and demographics. it’s like you’re saying Nikon D3100 and D5100 wont sell because we have D7000?
This is what I see
GF=D3100
G=D5100
GH=D7000
they might make more later down the road but right now you can see by the price
Admin, small things to correct in the article
“as thin as GF2 (not as GF3)”
and “we want see a GF model” should be: “we don’t want to see a GF model”
Thanks for your correction! Two stupi mistakes damn 🙁
i think the correct term is “we WONT see a GF model”. Admin was right, but made a typo with “want”
Cool..you got rid of ALL the dials and now I can’t even attach my viewfinder. Thanks Panasonic! (background sound of flushing toilet).
I have decided to put Micro 4/3 aside for a while and concentrate on my DSLR. It is becoming more and more attractive because I can actually take real photos with it. (ordered a Zeiss 21mm 2.8 yesterday…and I can see I put my money in the right place!!). I didn’t get into Micro 4/3’s format to play with toys. The promise of this format is really evaporating for this photographer..
Has your Micro 4/3 camera stopped working since the upcoming models were announced?
Based on the GF1 offering…I thought this was a format that was going to improve and grow into something even better. Not devolve. I am considering selling everything that I own in the format at this point. Maybe save up for an M9.
The G3 and GH2 are probably beneath his skill level since he is a “real” photographer. 😉
I spend a lot of time complaining about camera companies myself, but that’s simply due to frustration because no one has ever made what I want (Fuji X100 with interchangeable lenses). However, I never presume cameras like the GF2/GF3 are toys that are beneath me. A skilled photographer can get great results with damn near any camera…the upcoming GF3 included.
A lot of us are frustrated, but it seems we lose sight of the fact this system is only 2 years old. Our high end model will get here eventually.
Eric..wanna go head to head…Post some images..I will post mine. I am a photographer. A REAL photographer. Not a snappy snap-shooter. Its a passion. Put your photos where your mouth is. 🙂 Let’s go sniper. Bet I shoot you dead.
That aside….These cameras are devolving into snapshot cameras. Big disappointment. G3 same thing. GH2 more of a video camera with VERY LITTLE improvement in ISO performance. And expensive to upgrade for what you are getting if you are strictly a stills photographer. (good improvement on focusing and frame/rate with the GH2 tho…I will give Panasonic that…but it is a $900 body, SLR style, and unavailable to purchase).
There is reason to be disappointed here.
Well I wasn’t planning on getting into a penis measuring contest here, nor did I brag about my own skills, and I’m not going to start now, but if you’d like to look at my photos you’re more then welcome to check out my Flickr Photostream:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/eparks/
Not really sure how one goes about choosing the “better” photographer though. Different styles make for different opinions. Not that I’m concerned about how I match up with you or anyone else for that matter in the first place.
OK Eric…I am surprised…you mount a personal attack at me, not a genreal statement and you actually can handle a camera. Unusual.
Nice work. Here is mine. We do different stuff…but we can both shoot. Your ego is in it…my ego is in it. Period.
See sampling of my work here:
http://www.dropmocks.com/mVfy-
That being said… you are happy with the GF3 info?
Here is my beef. I bought a GF1…from what I could see two years ago…I thought this system was going somewhere. (comparison…DSLR …Canon 5D >5D Mark II and the info on the Pike 5DMark III is that the image quality will be astounding in the next generation).
Panasonic keeps putting out cameras in this format and there is VERY LITTLE improvement in image quality and they continuously take away the manual controls in the GF line and now have turned it into a snapshot camera with no viewfinder. Aren’t YOU disappointed??????
I’m shocked as well, most times I read internet comments like your put down of the GF3 they usually come from people that subscribe to RSS feeds of DxO and take photos of brick walls to point out how poor a camera is. However I genuinely like some of your photos…you should create a Flickr account. It’s a great community for photographers.
I see you have a Contax G2….I’m still holding out hope for a digital one someday. Which is what I hope the “Pro PEN” will be.
Am I happy about the news of the GF3? Yes and no. I’d prefer the “pro” GF arrive before the GF3, but I am also interested in the GF3 as 2nd body. If it has the IQ of the G3 in camera so small that it will fit in my pocket it will make a great hiking camera. I can mount the 20mm on and put it in my pocket. Then put the Olympus 9-18mm in my backpack. It would sure beat lugging around the G1 like I do now.
On top of that, I think the GF3 will be a big seller to average users. If it brings more users into the system then I’m all for it.
Sold my Contax Kit this year to buy glass for my DSLR…..just never shoot film anymore. Too bad contax couldn’t go digital…they were a photographer’s dream.
I am old …but I travel all over and backpack too. Utah is my favorite. Yes..Micro 4/3’s works in the backpack. I had a G1 too…but the autofocus was problematic for me and I got rid of it. Hoping for a pro GF. I have a lot of glass for the system…and am just frustrated…I thought this system had the potential to be the poor-man’s Leica with auto focus (think Contax)….but it just isn’t happening.
Touch screen…..please..shoot me!!!!!!! LOL!
Ha, don’t get me wrong. I understand your frustration. I switch cameras every other month it seems because I can’t find digital camera I truly like (can’t afford a Leica M9). I even switched back to film for a while using my Pentax LX because I love that camera so much. However, I understand the business side of things. People like us are niche users to a company like Panasonic. They are more interested in the “Canon Rebel” crowd….and that’s fine. Once they start generating revenue with their soccer mom cameras perhaps they’ll finally release a photographers camera.
Olympus frustrates me more than Panasonic though. Panasonic is like Sony and Samsung, a huge electronics giant. However at their core Olympus is an optics company. It seems like Olympus should be the company focusing on the needs of photographers and less mainstream cameras. They truly could be an affordable Leica alternative if they just tried.
yeah…Olympus is really frustrating. I have not bought anything from them. Bought the Pany 7-14mm. The Olympus Micro 4/3’s products are just lackluster…They have this incredible optics factory in Japan and some of their 4/3’s glass really was good from what I have read…but they get into this system …buy a sensor from a competitor and then produce ALL 2nd rate lenses for the system. Maybe that will change with the 12mm????? We shall see. I have been thinking “Contax” who knows what Olympus and Panasonic have been thinking ???? LOL! I can’t justify an M9 either.
All I know is I have a Zeiss 21mm ZE coming for my 5D MarkII tomorrow…that should take the edge off my disappointment here!!!!!!! :-)…but I doubt that that setup will end up in my backpack anytime soon.
Will NOT buy, waiting for a “PRO” version with built in EVF and GF1 buttons, dials.
If it has G3 electronics it is a killer camera for girls/woman!
Same probleme like Sony:
Small camera but BIG LENSES-> So still prefere Olympus!
So we have a iPhone mini (GF3) on top of our usual iPhone offering (GF pro, G3, GH2) is a bad thing, and as a result someone would put their existing camera aside and not use it.
LMAO
What’s the point of as super small body if you still have a big honking lens attached?
The Sony NEX is only compact with a pancake lens.
NEX-5 + 18-55 is a little bit smaller than GF1 + 14-45, I think it will be the same between NEX-C3 and GF2.
But Panasonic must make callapsible lens! (if they can… Perhaps it is not possible due to the in-lens image stabilisation)
I have no idea who would buy those horribly shaped NEX cameras anyway. Any decent lens on that camera and they look and handle like a board with a glass nailed to it.
If you want a small camera with a pancake lens attached and a big sensor, you can just as well buy one of those compact APS-C based Sigmas.
Not really. They handle just fine. The only problem with anything other than the pancakes is that the size of the entire package doesn’t fit in a big pocket any more, a problem Panasonic also has because of its non-collapsible lenses.
A lot of people that condemn the NEX-5’s handling haven’t actually used it for any length of time. Even I’ve had to change my initial impressions, though, like any camera the Japanese have come out with recently, it still has things that make you scratch your head in the design. But I’d put the NEX-5 at least at the same level of handling as the GF2, and probably better.
Thank you. An opinion from someone who has actually used both cameras.
+1
The NEX-5’s tilting LCD is brilliant and I think handles better than the GF2 or the Oly(s) for that reason. The 930,000+/- pixel screen is absolutely beautiful. Panasonic and Olympus should put LCDs with that level of brightness and resolution on their high-end cameras.
Too bad Sony’s “solution” to their dearth of native lenses is to try and get people to adapt their A-series lenses. Hey, but I’m using Nikon and Pentax manual lenses to fill M4/3 holes. 😉
Possibility of using pretty much every existing lens including Leica M isnt bad thing. 🙂
Though I agree some high quality zooms/primes wouldnt be bad.
Agree with Mr. Reee! I’ve used a NEX-5 and it’s size combined with an incredibly compact tilting screen and a fairly usable grip is excellent in use (for it’s size).
The disadvantage with NEX is primarily the userinterface when you don’t want to use the auto modes, and the too big lenses which kind of defeats the purpose of the small body.
I agree with Thom. I used a NEX-3 on a vacation to NYC last Fall and took some of the best street pics of my life over the course of a week. The only reason I sold it is due to the lack of a hot shoe and non-existent lens selection. If you think the only way to use a camera is holding it like a DSLR then you’re not going to like cameras like this, but if you don’t mind shooting from the hip (literally) then cameras like this work great. However, if the GF3 doesn’t have a flip out screen that will indeed hinder it. The thing that made the NEX-3 so useful to me was the flip-out screen.
That said, I’m waiting on a GF1-like camera with built-in EVF for my next camera, but that is only because I use strobes quite often and I need a view finder and hot shoe to mount the RF trigger. However, I won’t hesitate recommending cameras like the NEX’s to “normal users”.
I’m with Thom and Eric. I’ve got a NEX3. With the 16mm and even fisheye attachment and the 18-55, it does alright. I did try the 18-200. That is not a good idea. My EP1 + 14-150 is a much better one-lens travel set.
I think a fast 35mm lens would be a good idea for Sony, but instead they are doing a 30mm macro at 3.5. That doesn’t strike me as the right lens for that system. Also, a pancake 24mm would be good for them to release. Their lenses are holding them back.
The Sony NEX lens road map and mockups look horrid. That is the only reason I’m not going to switch back to the NEX system even after the NEX-7 is released. The Zeiss 24mm will be a great lens, and I could use that for 60% of what I do, but I have no interest in any of their 3 current lenses due to IQ issues (and bulk in the case of the 18-200mm). Their wide angle zoom mockup could be a winner, but only if it has much higher IQ then their current lenses. Their G series standard zoom mock up just looks gigantic. I’m sure it will be a good lens, but even I won’t advocate putting a lens that large on a small camera body. Aside from those lenses it doesn’t look like they’ll have anything else interesting until after 2013. By that point I’ll have a near complete m4/3’s kit.
Because this camera would be more for the P&S customers (to upgrade to) who won’t have a “thumping big lens” to attach to it anyhow. I hardly think Panasonic is going small only. They will still have the larger models too (as rumoured).
Very good news, i will love a tiny camera with big sensor and a pancake lens
But I prefer external buttons and smaller screen instead
Sorry for my English
Sounds like perfect English to me. 🙂
I really hope this isn’t true!!! Come on – we want a true semi-pro compact to compete with the X100! The poll says it all! Stop spending R & D money on ‘toy cameras’ and expand the fixed lenses and more comprehensive camera bodies!!!
Actually BOTH a tiny, minimalist body AND a semi-pro rangefinder (GF1) style body that can share lenses would be great for the platform. Like several of us mentioned last week about about low-end and high-end bodies of similar style (rangefinder and built-in EVF). Why not add a mini-body to the mix to hit all the bases?
I love my GH2, but might jump at the opportunity to use my lenses on a smaller, simpler body. My girlfriend and I travel quite a bit and having a small camera where we could swap lenses would be great. 20mm on the mini, 7-14mm or whatever on the GH2.
That’s why I wish Oly and Panasonic had worked out a UNIVERSAL accessory port so that not only lenses, but viewfinders and such could be swapped as well.
That kind of flexibility is what a system should be all about.
>[…] having a small camera where we could swap lenses would be great. 20mm on the mini, 7-14mm or whatever on the GH2.
Looking at the data: GF2 is about 68mm height. Down by 10 to 15% is about 58 to 61mm height. Matching available lenses are
P 14mm 55.5mm diameter
O 17mm 57mm
O 9-18 56.5mm
O 14-42 II 56.5mm
Already critical
P 14-42/45 60mm
Slightly too big
P 20mm 63mm
O 40-150 63mm
What lens will go with the GF3?
Panasonic should have a lot of credit for doing new camera designs and dearing to challenge the established DSLR market and norms.
Choice is a good thing, even though this design might not be for everyone. I look forward to the semi pro model myself.
Yes I am also ok with an ulta tiny camera. It makes sense for all those interested in getting the smallest as possible camera. But there should be a more advanced model too. And according to my sources Panasonic recognized that!
admin, When will the semi pro GF be annnounced?
Don’t know that yet.
That reminds me the golden days when Olympus E-620 conquers the world with the name “World’s Smallest DSLR” using the ZD 25mm F/2.8 pancake, which comes with “still-in-use” 12mp Live-MOS, IBIS, flipping screen, art filter and optional battery grip.
Oh! Did I miss mentioning the innovative back-lit buttons? I just wonder why E-5 and other P&S don’t come with this very practical design.
I can see great potential for the PEN-mini model from Oly. Small body with large format sensor and IBIS, sold with either a collapsable standard zoom lens or a pancake prime lens. Don’t forget their lens converters (marco, wide angle, fisheye) which are compatible with the kit lens! It’s a quite appealing package for a first time P&S upgrader IMHO. Especially if they mark the price right.
Nice, very nice!
This is what Panasonic gets and Olympus doesn’t: a complete product line gives you an influx of upgraders who can build brand loyalty. This guy with a tiny pancake on him is going to be killer for the P&S crowd, and once they’re in, there are plenty of upgrade choices in the Panasonic lineup to choose from. Heck, depending on how bad the ergonomics end up being, I could easily see picking one up myself. This with the 20mm on it is going to be awesome.
Panasonic really gets it, the same way Sony gets it: having a complete product line is key to bringing in new customers, and to keeping them satisfied with their long term options.
Yes the GF body could be made a little smaller without necessarily effecting its handling for the target audience. Pany has no need to reduce its thickness as already marginally less than new NEXC3 while to reduce width slightly just tuck in the end strap holders like the G3 so don’t protrude. The GF can be made same height or less than NEXC3 since the m4/3 mount flange is less than APS-C one so could still claim the GF3 to be the world’s smallest interchangeable lens camera for now? While some may cry about loss of hot shoe, with good ISO JPEGS up to 6500 ISO (imaging resources says 11×14 prints) why do you need an external flash anyway as inbody flash can provide fill flash and this would reduce cost to manufacture. Those wanting more can get the larger semi-pro GF model instead for mounting larger higher grade or faster or longer lenses.
The one thing Pany in my opinion will not do is leave out the top control wheel as they did on the GF2, after all existing TZs and LXs have them? Deleting the hotshoe also frees up space to add control wheel and mount the sound mics but again the small LX5 has a hotshoe so why couldn’t the new FG3? Thus rather than just reissue the popular GF1 with new sensor and JPEG processor instead we get a replacement of the GF1 in mini pocketable form? As others have noted Pany does need to come out with a new smaller collapsible zoom kit lens for this camera.
The rumor of a semi-pro GF also coming in the fall suggests that this rangefinder body with EVF will also be relatively small and not large sized like L1 suggesting possible smaller EVF and/or rear screen. Most project it will be like the depiction in Panys patent. To keep the body thickness down they would use similar design to X100 EVF but it could swivel upwards. This model with larger battery compartment could also be the replacement of the GH series?
No hot shoe and crippled controls? I can already hear the outrage before having read any talkbacks.
But a camera is always a story of compromises and obviously, such tiny model won’t be a jack-of-all-trades. But it doesn’t mean that it won’t have any appeal, even to serious shooters. It just will never be a do-it-all.
At first, I was dubious about the GF-2 untill I saw one next to a GF-1. In real life, the size difference is striking and it does matter.
This is great news re: semi-pro GF model coming soon. If it has built-in EVF in a non-SLR styled body, I’m sure they’ll sell a lot. At least, I’ll buy one for sure.
Admin, What about the LVF1 follow up ? There were renewal rumors ?
Should we excpect anything along with GF3 and semi-pro ?
Anyway, Thom Hogan is right, I believe we are living terrific camera evolution !
zero rumors about that. 🙁
It makes perfect sense for Panasonic to introduce more GF type models.
A recent interview at photography blog:
http://www.photographyblog.com/articles/panasonic_g3_question_and_answer/
gives some insights into their thoughts and strategies. The cameras without built in EVFs account for the majority of sales and the success of this type shows that many photographers are content to use a screen.
The last few occasions I have been asked to take somebody’s photograph, I have had to squint at a screen and I get the impression many younger people have never used a viewfinder.
It is likely the GF2 will remain on sale for a while at a low price point, to tempt people who may otherwise have bought a Ganon G12 type camera, while they also will also have similarly sized, but more expensive cameras (with the newer sensor) to provide an upgrade path to GF1 owners.
I would be most surprised to see Panasonic launch a GF1 sized camera with built in EVF, since they are currently promoting the G3 as the smallest camera with a viewfinder. A smaller one would presumably have to be a bit more expensive than the G3 and thus would be regarded as competing with both the G3 and the GH2.
I have seen a number of reviews in British magazines praising the touch screen on the G2 and GF2 and I think Panasonic regards this as one of their USPs. Perhaps Pana’s preoccupation with this type of user interface gives Olympus an opportunity to launch something distinctive.
No hotshoe means reliance on a small pop-up flash? And on such a tiny body, will a small pop-up flash be blocked by any lens bigger than a pancake lens? Maybe if the GF3 has the same high-ISO capability as the G3 seems to have this can work, since users will be more dependent on available light.
It’s not a camera for me, but it seems it could fill a need. Good luck to them.
The biggest issue I see as a states-side customer is availability (going back to my first Panny cam — the TZ5). Of course, the US is only 1/3 (?) the world camera market, but if you can’t get your product to 1/3 of your target customers, then that’s just really poor. I can’t shoot a single photo with a spot on a wait list. I need actual camera and lenses!
I hope that this megapixel race stopps immediately. It is even worse than the megapixel race.
no Bulb is garbage !
no DMW-RSL1 connector is garbage !
no Tethered Shooting via USB is garbage !
I wonder if they will get the viwfinder to fit behind a raised lens mount. If the view finder hides a little behind the lens it might help it blend in better with the camera. It could be quite interesting.
You bring up an interesting point and suggestion to Panasonic. If Pany has still retained a hotshoe like the LX5 then a mounted EVF on the lowered body would be lowered by up to 0.3-0.4 inch by such a concept? At 2.3 or 2.4 inch height body the lens mount for m4/3 need not protrude above the body. So possible Pany could come up with several variations of the same but I do hope for a higher resolution small EVF.
This is the camera I have been waiting for and I will be buying it asap. As a professional shooter, I do not want to carry around a dslr or anything that resembles a dslr while on vacation. I want a larger sensor camera that I can fit in my pocket. And being that all of my pants come with at least 4 pockets, I will have no problem fitting the camera body + pancake lens in one and the 14-42 in the other. I also want a simple camera because 50% of my vacation photos are taken by random people. I want to be able to hand this to a random tourist with out them looking at me like a deer in headlights. I don’t see the point of a semipro camera: I’m either working or I’m not. When I’m working it’s a 5DmkII, when I’m not it will be this. I’m never kind of working or in a state of semipro.
I just hope this comes in a kit with the 20mm f/1.7
@ET this sounds extremely logical to me. I’m not a pro, but just happen to like cameras with decent IQ that I can actually carry with me at all times. I used to own SLRs but never took them with me. I’m more than happy to trade off some image quality for compactness. I love my GF1 and its IQ is still satisfying to me. Although I do realise there’s room for improvement. So, if Pany would release a successor with a bit more DR and a brighter screen (or better optional EVF) than that’s just fine with me.
Reducing the size of the GF series even further makes a lot of sense. Panasonic needs to be able to demonstrate the advantages of the smaller 4/3 sensor in both body and lens size.
We are moving towards a much greater range of camera sizes. This will appeal to different market segments as well as serious shooters. For me a super compact body will be primarily interesting as a backup to my main camera on trips. I like to travel light but would rather not be without some sort of backup should something happen to the GH2. A super compact body is also ideal for incidental shooting and social occasions when something larger gets in the way.
Agree, “a tiny body with pancakes” sounds like something new to me but very interesting, i might go for it.
but it also means that i have to adapt to shooting with panckakes as zooms dont make much sense with such body
I have the GF2 & GH1. I think the GF2 is “small enough”, because it really comes down to lens size.
Taking MORE buttons away from the GF2 is Crazy. Its the main thing I dont like about the camera. Honestly, all they needed to do was make the Q-menu the same as the gh1, they would be way ahead of the game.
Oh and how about AE lock button
Oh and how about remote shutter release connector..
I think this small tiny gf3 will be more of a flop than the gf2. Panasonic is not listening..
Why have an inbuilt flash? I’ve had the gf1 and the 20 mm for over half a year and I’ve never used the small flash. (No big one either) I’d much much rather have an evf! High res for manual focus during video.
I understand GF3 aka tiny GF with no buttons and no hot shoe. It is not for me (I think) but I understand: it will bring customers = money = more R&D.
And it will be a pocket camera for some.
And to fight NEX where they lose: size! Nex will (should?) be always bigger because an APS sensor require bigger glass to cover more are or more expensive glass (think Leica).
A bigger sensor size IQ advantage will be eroded with new technology: APS-C will always be better, but some day the main target of these cameras: enthusiasts and semi-pros, will not notice difference on real world pictures (note: I’m not saying we are there yet: we are not).
Regarding glass, things are more difficult to reduce size. If you take the pancake route you may but enthusiasts and P&S upgraders want a zoom for first lens, preferable one that cover all focal range. They may evolve, but first lens is a zoom for most of customers and that means that NEX system is big as bigger than Olympus.
This is the thing Olympus is doing right: keep system (not camera only) as small as possible. Also because of their heritage. And IBIS helps on this area (for photos, not movies).
Panny is doing right on the AF speed for enthusiasts that do sports or have kids.
If rumors are true (and this is a big IF) this may mean that m43 will have a boost: both from Olympus and Panny.
This is what I like about competition: Sony helped m43 to became more mature system (if this is true, of course)
Enthusiasts want more IQ (than their P&S) and no SLR complexity no big size and bulkiness)
Pros/Semi Pros want a go-to-everywhere system with good/perfect enough IQ and a smaller size. Imagine buying your boy/girlfriend and camera that you also like to use while on vacation.
Some last words regarding Panny sensor:
1. Olympus has it probably because they must have it (part of the deal)
2. IMO the Panny sensor bad part is low DR, not noise. Noise is only an issue with low light, DR is an issue in daytime with clipping whites.
3. To make a good enough sensor don’t need to be a D7000 sensor, just 1,5-2 more stops of DR (not the 3,5-4 difference to D7000).
4. I would like to see G3 DXO mark sensor measures of DR (and only DR)
I think Panasonic simply scare after seeing the IQ which Olympus can produce with their last generation sensor on E-P series, and Olympus E-5 with 12mp pixel count can simply destroy what they can do on GH2 with their so-called lastest gen 16mp sensor. That’s why Panasonic do not want Olympus assess to their latest sensors.
In reverse, it means Olympus is leading in terms of software for image processing (i.e. at least one generation ahead of Panasonic for still images), they just need hardware.
> I understand GF3 aka tiny GF with no buttons and no hot shoe. It is not for me (I think) but I understand: it will bring customers
Yep. I don’t have a problem with that, either. Just as I don’t have a problem with Nikon doing a D3100 when I mostly use a D3s or D3x for serious work. It would be nice if these companies would make a cut down, small, version of their high end camera, though. A D700 is neither small nor cut down enough to fill the need. Likewise, Panasonic has a similar gap in their lineup (the much wanted GH-2 in a GF-1 body). But I also see that Panasonic doesn’t quite have as much breadth to their line and may be avoiding that until the top and bottom of the lines would be further apart than they are now.
> Nex will (should?) be always bigger because an APS sensor require bigger glass to cover more
This is a bit of a myth. Yes, you can make smaller lenses for smaller sensors, but in practice m4/3 and 4/3 actually use larger lenses than others might design for the format (thus the reason why some C-mount lenses work). But to say that NEX lenses will be big is to ignore the past. You can make smaller FULL FRAME lenses than the existing NEX lenses. To do so would complicate things (you might want to offset the microlenses like Leica did or use another strategy, but you can definitely make smaller equivalent lenses than Sony is currently making for the NEX. And the current 18-55mm is about the same size as Panasonic’s 14-42mm already.
> A bigger sensor size IQ advantage will be eroded with new technology
Not as much as you think. The physics of photons have some real finite boundaries in them. We’ll be using more and more “change the data” techniques (e.g. NR) to achieve better results with each generation. To get strongly accurate data you’ll need bigger sensors with bigger photon capture areas, period. I’m not as much as a snob on this one as some engineers have been. The cell phone cameras are actually using photosites smaller than “the theoretical limit” that some engineers believed in as little as 10 years ago. But those small sensors have all kinds of issues, too.
> If rumors are true (and this is a big IF) this may mean that m43 will have a boost: both from Olympus and Panny.
The problem for Olympus and Panasonic is that they are about to run into a boundary at the other side of small: even smaller sensor interchangeable lens cameras. This poses a real marketing issue for them, as they won’t be the smallest, so they’ll have to run with the “larger sensors make for better images” theme, which, of course, leaves them vulnerable to Samsung and Sony with their APS sensors sending the same message. Basically, O&P get reduced to the “Goldilocks Strategy.” You never want to have to resort to that marketing strategy if you can avoid it, as your “just right” isn’t necessarily everyone’s, and it’s too difficult to say WHY you’re just right and too easy for others to say why you’re not.
It’s difficult to believe that you can talk about how full frame and APS-C lenses can be made smaller and not also consider that there might be plans for micro four thirds lenses to be made smaller. Look at the NEX roadmap. How many tiny lenses do you see?
It’s difficult to believe you think there’s any necessary relationship between size of sensor and size of photosites.
Any smaller interchangeable lens system is just vapourware at the moment. It’s been rumoured. It’s been delayed. It’s been rumoured again. It’s been delayed again. Presuming you’re talking about Nikon, who knows how much they’ll want to risk cannibalising their cheaper DSLRs?
You’re talking like micro four thirds is on an inexorable slope to certain doom. And you seem to be using pretty disingenuous reasons.
(Sorry for feeding the troll.)
This site hasn’t had hardly any troll baiting up to now and all you’ve done is embarrass yourself with this post Bobby. Try to stay a little more positive.
You’re evidently disappointed by my post, tmrgrs, but I think there’s been plenty of troll baiting here, namely Thom Hogan’s posts. He seems to have no affection for micro four thirds and indeed seems to take great pleasure in sneering at O&P, and yet he hangs out here, endlessly repeating the same old, same old doomy opinions hoping to get reactions. He’s the very definition of a troll, I think. If he made good arguments, then that would be fine, but a lot of them seem to be really skewed – every other manufacturer is destined to make great advances, but O&P are fated to stand still.
I greatly enjoy my m43 camera, I feel positive about the future of mirrorless cameras, and about micro four thirds’ role within that segment, but Thom’s stuff can drive me up the wall! Apologies if I lowered the tone by using the ‘t’ word; it was the first time I’ve ever used it online, and I think it’s justified here.
You should find a way to disagree with Thom’s viewpoint that isn’t so negative. Your troll baiting diminishes you as a contributor here and does little if any harm to him. Funny how that works.
+1
But you are wrong. I mean, you have one opinion, Thom has another. You see a bright future for m43, Thom is more concerned. Why should any one of these opinions count as trolling? Also, please consider that Thom has actually run at least one serious tech company and has been in the IT/tech field for decades. Maybe, just maybe he sees things differently compared to you or me because of all this.
Oh yeah, admittedly he is also using m43 cameras and have been since the e-p1 launch basically…
Opinions are good to have on this site, and some of them will be right and some wrong, but to me Hogan’s are disingenuous, and that is not good. I know he has decades of experience, but with those decades he also seems to have picked up some old-time stereotypes of the Japanese that I find distasteful.
I also think that m43 (like every other format) has to overcome many challenges, and I’d be interested in hearing some pessimistic opinions, as long as they are genuine and not wilfully distorted. O&P are not subject to some physical laws that the other manufacturers can easily skirt, but Hogan sure makes it sound like it!
Anyway, we’re at this site because we so often see the world through a lens, and also because we’re interested in unsubstantiated fact. One reason I like this site is that its admin seems very genuine, for example in not throwing out dubious rumours to appease the people attacking him for a lack of leaks before the G3 launch. It’s the frequent juxtaposition of Admin and Hogan that seems curious to me. Ok, Admin sees something in this guy, so maybe I’ll one day see something in him too. It’s the last time I’ll comment on his posts until/unless I do though, you’ll be pleased to hear! Peace, B
> every other manufacturer is destined to make great advances
Which just shows me that you didn’t actually read the article that the Admin referred to. To point out just one of the things I wrote in that article, in this case about Canon and Nikon: “declining returns from [their current] strategy.” I most certainly didn’t condemn m4/3 and say everyone else was going to succeed.
I’m glad you enjoy your m4/3 camera. I enjoy mine. But I think it can be better, and I think it needs to get better for the mount to have a long, healthy life like the main mounts have.
> It’s difficult to believe that you can talk about how full frame and APS-C lenses can be made smaller and not also consider that there might be plans for micro four thirds lenses to be made smaller.
Olympus is the only company making “small lenses” in my opinion. But as small as they are, I’ve got 35mm film lenses that are smaller. Lens design is a series of compromises. Panasonic has discovered that you can compromise linear distortion and correct it in the camera. Nikon has discovered that you can compromise chromatic aberration and correct it in the camera. The future is going to be more of the same, and the net result is going to be physically smaller lenses in the consumer realm.
> Look at the NEX roadmap. How many tiny lenses do you see?
None. But look at the Samsung roadmap and you see something completely different. Both use APS sensors.
> It’s difficult to believe you think there’s any necessary relationship between size of sensor and size of photosites.
Have no idea what you’re talking about here. The critical measurement of a photosite is area, and specifically light responsive area. That latter is one reason why we flipped sensors over (BSI) for very small sensors. A 12mp FX sensor has 72 square microns of light sensing area. A 12mp APS/DX sensor has 30 square microns. A 12mp m4/3 sensor has 18 square microns. In other words, a little more than half the collection area of DX and one quarter that of 35mm full frame.
> Any smaller interchangeable lens system is just vapourware at the moment.
That’s correct. But denying that it’s coming isn’t helpful to the discussion. Most camera companies are designing out four or five years in advance. They have to consider a world where that camera exists and understand how they’ll compete against it.
> Presuming you’re talking about Nikon, who knows how much they’ll want to risk cannibalising their cheaper DSLRs?
I was actually thinking more of Pentax, though Nikon also has a smaller design in R&D. I’m actually somewhat surprised no one has taken a smaller sensor and made an interchangeable lens camera with it (Ricoh’s odd solution excepted).
As for cannibalizing, in high tech you very quickly learn that you have two primary choices: (1) cannibalize your own products correctly and grow; or (2) let others cannibalize your products and shrink.
> You’re talking like micro four thirds is on an inexorable slope to certain doom.
Really? “Tenuous foothold” and “tough road ahead” are NOT “inexorable.” You use words incorrectly in many of your responses. Inexorable means “impossible to stop or prevent.” Nothing I’ve written suggests that m4/3 is impossible to keep from doom. Indeed, I wouldn’t invest one fraction of a moment of my time if I thought it was impossible to save it. And you seem not to actually read my site much. You probably aren’t aware of the fact that I proclaimed the E-PL1 the “best US$399 camera” recently.
> And you seem to be using pretty disingenuous reasons.
So I’m not candid or sincere? That’s what “disingenuous” means. It usually means that someone has an ulterior motive, too. So what would that ulterior motive of mine be?
I’m sincere in one thing: I want better cameras. From EVERY manufacturer.
> (Sorry for feeding the troll.)
And finally, you misuse the word troll. Please show me where I’ve posted inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages (and remember, I was not the one who posted this topic in the first place, the Admin did).
Well, I said I wasn’t going to reply, but I wasn’t expecting a reply to this post from you, Thom. We seem to have different definitions of the ‘t’ word; you’re certainly not one according to your definition, and reading your most recent responses I’d say you’re not one according to mine either. You’re actually someone who frequently expresses strident and often very pessimistic opinions, but the reasoning you give whilst in ‘strident mode’ can be so sketchy as to be misleading. I’m not convinced by your reasoning, but I now think you are sincere. I think you could have expressed yourself a lot, lot better, but hey– it was a ‘below the line’ blog comment, and expectations must be placed accordingly. I apologise.
I really could point out a misunderstanding or two in your response, but I think it’s best to move on for the tone of this fine site. I don’t think I’ll ever buy a 3:2 camera, but I wish the other manufacturers well, and let’s hope we do indeed get better cameras (and maybe smaller lenses!:-) ) from *every* manufacturer. Sayonara, Thom.
It’s not my definition, nor do I go around defining words (though I am credited for originating one slang use of a phrase in the tech lexicon circles ;~). I simply quoted the first part of the Wikipedia definition.
As for “so sketchy to be misleading” you’re going to have to give me a precise example for that.
Finally, “not expecting a reply,” wow is that dismissive. YOU get to post but I don’t get to respond? That sounds fair. Note that YOUR post used the word (addressing me) “you” or a variant of it six times. It sure looked like you wanted a reply, so I made one.
We’re just on different wavelengths here, Thom. I didn’t mean ‘not expecting a reply’ to be ‘dismissive’. I meant ‘I didn’t think you would reply.’ I had noted you had recently been active elsewhere on the site. I thought that either you had read my post and decided you wouldn’t reply to it, or enough time had passed that you wouldn’t have been out rooting through comment threads in old blog posts. Evidently I misjudged that.
It’s unlikely that you’ll convert me to being a fan of your writing, but does that really matter to you? I imagine most definitely ‘no’. There’s no need to stew over what some random person wrote in blog post comments, and nothing will be accomplished by us communicating any more, I think! Best wishes to you, Thom.
Thanks Thom for your comments. As always very instructive.
Just some notes:
Sensor:
I believe bigger sensors does deliver better IQ period. My comment is that for enthusiasts – not pros- in some time (not now) they may be convinced that they see that difference on real photos but they don’t.
Bigger sensor gives also smaller DOF, one of the “big sensor advantages” and like you said in your blog: O&P need F1.4 lenses to act similar to competitors on the PRO side.
Lenses:
I know is a myth (think Leica and even some Pentax tiny pancakes), but they may be more expensive, not only to build but to design (more knowledgeable engineers aka expensive engineers); even Voigtlander (Japanese Cosina) made m43 25mm 0.95 on the big size and they know how to make lenses (yes I know is F0.95).
Size:
Yes they may be bigger the “Pro” P&S size (LX5, XZ1, S95…), but the IQ is only comparable on very good light and even then… O&P should make the smallest possible camera for each target (p&s upgraders, enthusiasts, semi-pros) with all tricks included (small body, collapsible lenses, IBIS to avoid bigger lenses, etc) keeping camera confortable in hand. This is probably the only “common” advantage to every CSC user.
Having good OOC JPEG is also an advantage to almost all users (there are some that prefer always RAW no matter how good JPEG is): good second body
Personally (not for all customers but many may agree):
For me? well for me it will be a “P&S” that gives me more flexibility and IQ enough to take great pictures – i.e. i can’t blame equipment because is perfect enough for the job – and make me enjoy what I do like more on photography: _taking/composing_ pictures with a camera always with me, not processing them. That’s why OOC JPEG is priority. YMMV.
> My comment is that for enthusiasts – not pros- in some time (not now) they may be convinced that they see that difference on real photos but they don’t.
Would agree. I’ve been writing since 2005 “If you can’t get a good looking print at the maximum size a desktop inkjet can produce (13×19″) from any current DSLR, it’s not the camera that’s the problem.” That said, advances in sensors have helped mask user issues, which in turn, promotes sales.
> O&P should make the smallest possible camera for each target
Well, Olympus maybe. It was part of their claim to fame (the other part being optical quality) and probably should be this go around. It’s a position that’s still available in the market. Panasonic, not so much. Panasonic has a bigger problem on their hands, and that’s Sony and Samsung. And Panasonic has to not only mimic Sony in still cameras but also in video cameras (as the m4/3 AG-AF100 versus APS FS-100 duel is proving). Frankly, if I were Panasonic, I’d buy Nikon and rebrand the entire imaging division. It would really mess up Sony and effectively blunt Samsung. (But that would still leave Panasonic with terrible marketing and distribution, which would still need fixing ;~).
Thom, I think you hit the mark with the Goldilocks analogy. Pentax and Nikon will have smaller lenses for their micro-systems and Sony, Ricoh, Samsung and possibly Fuji will have larger sensors putting Oly between a rock and a hard place with an outdated Panny sensor or sensor geared for video. I think they desperately need to develop or out-source a sensor on their own so they have something to differentiate themselves. They have fantastic glass but that will not be enough in the long haul IMHO.
Snowbird, I think Nikon is the only missing player yet. Pentax (according to rumors) will have a tiny CCD, and may be have an APS-C sensor.
Nikon (perhaps helped by Thom) chose 2.5x crop factor. This may mean really small lenses (and they know how to make lenses and do Quality control) and if they add a small body… maybe there’s a winner.
But they are coming to market a litle bit late. Earthquake didn’t help. If Olympus deliver a Pro photographic centric body (and what a big IF) Nikon may loose part of its target market, not all though.
Panny is planning a 12-60 bright lens (on the big side due to OIS). If Olympus follows and do a m43 (F2?) version of its 12-60 4/3, there will be two pro level lenses that will make a hard time o O&P competitors.
Competition is a good thing… to customers.
Nikon had patented all the 2.5x designs long before they talked with me. We did have a discussion that intersected with something that was unique about that camera (not the sensor size), but I have no idea whether they listened to my thoughts there and won’t until the product finally appears. Personally, I fail to see how a 2.5x sensor fits in the marketplace unless there’s something we don’t know about it that is disruptive (e.g. a 2.5x sensor with Nikon’s 3-layer patent instead of Bayer could be a game changer).
Thom, but perhaps it is cheaper to make smaller lens for the MFT then for NEX?
the current NEX lens are not too promising:
the 18-200 OSS is almost 50% bigger then 14-150 (which is not small by itself)
the 16mm panckacke is really soft in the borders, actually only the 18-55 kit holds up preety well, but my guess is that its easier to design,
Leaked image of the NEX lens roadmap suggests (at alpharumors)that future nex lens are quite big – the “high quality zoom” & 50mm f1.8 looks as big as the oly 14-150,
also my biggest issue with sony is lack of pancakes’ what is the use of tiny bodies such as NEX-C3 if the lens are big?
when a pocketable GF3+14mm sounds perfect to me for a short walk-around
In general, I’ve been told that the smaller the imaging circle the more difficult it is to produce extremely high quality. There are some exceptions, and things are changing in lenses as we use computational abilities to correct for “defects” (e.g. Panasonic’s linear compensation or Nikon’s chromatic aberration compensation).
Thing is, it’s the middle ground I think that’s vulnerable long-term. At the pro/high end, size and mass actually has benefits. At the consumer end, small size is more imperative than eeking out a bit more image quality, I think. Consumer cameras need to fit in a purse or pocket to compete with camera phones.
If pixel/photosite size is smaller then of course lens has to produce sharper image meaning in general better corrected aberrations.
But as balancing factor there’s the fact that when sensor gets bigger size of required image circle increases and lens aberrations get progressively worser when moving farther from image circle’s center and correcting that requires lot more glass. Good part of APS-C lenses would surely be bigger than currently if those had as high optical quality as Four Thirds glass.
(same optical designs/tricks can be used for both sensor sizes so let’s leave that factor out)
As for size argument larger mass of bigger equipment sure has its hand shake stabilizing effect (until mass gets too heavy and tires hands leading to shake) but for carrying equipment longer distances and durations medium size&mass beats big. (anyone disagreeing should go to trek in Himalaya above 5km)
Really more important factor is ergonomy and user interface.
Camera is tool and should fit to hand like glove offering also fast to use controls instead of being in the way of shooting. And that’s where Micro Four Thirds is serious disappointment with “highest” end struggling to catch low end of Four Thirds.
And like you Thom said about future being challenging for m4/3 this lack of higher end part of the system is surely leaving door well open for Canikon to come and go past with their big brand name if left uncorrected.
Don’t disagree with your comment except for one thing: lens aberrations get progressively worse and correcting them means more glass. That’s exactly where aspherical and other new lens element techniques started to change things. Those changes aren’t yet done. (And yes, they can be applied to smaller formats, too.) We’re still getting new tech to compensate for that.
A larger image circle implies that the optics must have greater light gathering power in order to illuminate the said sensor. To say that there is no relationship between the size of the sensor and the size of optics (or the complexity for that matter) is a myth is outright wrong. Sony 18-55 is at least larger in diameter than the Panasonic 14-42 at the least. If you want to do a proper comparison, you’d need to compare two lenses from either system with the same f-stop and focal length.
Exactly. As far as I understand it, there are physical limitations involved directly related to the sensor size and lens diameter. To say that it is a ‘bit of a myth’ that there will be no size difference between the formats is misleading. While it may be the case that the current Panasonic lens and the NEX lens are of similar size, it does not change what the physical design limitations are.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-number
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crop_factor
We’ve also got to remember that traditional DSLRs have a mirror in the way, pushing the lens further out from the sensor and requiring a more complicated retrofocus design in certain lenses. Not to mention that many traditional full frame lenses we think of are manual focus lenses without any fancy AF technology.
I have to wonder, is it really possible to make smaller AF full frame lenses than NEX is making as was said further above? If so, please point to some examples and explain how, because it seems to go against the physics…
> To say that it is a ‘bit of a myth’ that there will be no size difference between the formats is misleading.
Just to be clear, I’m not exactly saying that. I’m saying that the 4/3 standard dictated a large image circle for the format to promote telecentricity while there is no particular APS standard that says the same thing. The differences are not as great as the format size difference would tend to indicate.
But beyond that, be careful of using traditional lens design as the primary way of determining what the future will bring. Just as aspherical element designs changed lens designs (and sizes), some of the technologies just now coming into play will do the same. When I originally proposed my large sensor compact design several years ago, a lens designer and I actually spent some time to work through a “different design,” some of which is now in patent filings. The result was a 28-80mm f/4-5.6 DX lens that DOES NOT protrude from a very compact body.
*Nods. It would appear the the lens size difference is not going to be huge in the case between m43 and APS mirrorless formats, but by the same reasoning, I think it’s also fair to say that the difference in picture quality determined by sensor size (as one factor) is also not that large. We’ve already seen what the GH-2 can do.
So as you noted above, APS is always going to be at least slightly larger than m43 in lens design due to the light-gathering physics of lens pupil diameter, and m43 is always going to be slightly lower picture quality compared to APS if using a sensor of the same technology and processing. Would that be fair to say?
In the end then, the user must choose which tradeoff they take (slightly smaller lenses or slightly better image quality), but of course many other factors come into play, such as available lens lineup (and quality), technological developments and unique features at a software level.
As for advances in lens technology, that is very welcomed. I wonder though if the laws won’t still hold true? I.e. if a new design were used on NEX that made a lens as small as or smaller than an equivalent on m43, that m43 manufacturers could use a similar design to build a lens that is smaller still. That is, can advances in lens technologies actually circumvent the formula we use to determine lens pupil diameter, f-stop and focal length?
This would be a good move if true and if they executed it in such a way that more focus was on better image quality, smaller bodies and intuitive controls. My GF1 is a tank.. and that’s both good and bad. I’d love if these were the size of my old TZ5 or something in that size category for portability to use with my 20mm pancake lens. 🙂
The E5 hardly destroys the GH2, the GH2 has considerably better Dynamic range and is roughly equal in noise. Olympus procsessing engines have always been first class however, and yes they are doing incredibly well with that old sensor. If they did the same to the Gh2 sensor THEN it would destroy the GH2, but at the moment no.
I really don’t know why the 2 companies don’t just merge imaging divisions, imagine what could be achieved with the best of both?
Does anybody know if the current G2 supports HDMI out like the GH2? Or is the GH2 the only Panasonic 4/3 camera that supports HDMI out? Thank you.I have the GH2 on order right now because I need the HDMI out capabilities, but if the G2 or G3 would also support, that would be great. Thanks for your input.
The G2 has HDMI out. What I don’t know is whether it is clean output (i.e. can be freed of all the overlays you see on the LCD so you can record video out from it). Most HDMI implementations in cameras mimic what’s going to the LCD only.
I have used the HDMI output on my G2 to connect to my Sony TV. The camera is set in playback mode and then the TV remote control is used to navigate and select images for viewing. This is at its most effective when used to view 16:9 format stills or HD videos.
GF2 is already small enough, or more accurately, it is too small in some sense. I always wonder if Panasonic gonna make small but high quality camera, she should produce a leisure camera like Sigma DP series or Fuji X100 with large aperture fixed prime lens. Lens interchangeable is not necessary but just need to be manually control easy and focus fast. The only problem is the large aperture lens might be hard to keep the size small. If I were Panasonic, I would make it with Leica 17mm f/1.4 or f/1.4 if possible! The price must be half of X100. I believe it should be best selling camera ever.
Hey Admin, I know you can’t say much right now, but from what you know is it safe to say we should get excited?
Not yet.
I think it is a great idea to make a real pocketable camera (with pancake lens) for a second or mass consumer level camera. If it sells well, it will bring nothing but more lenses for the system.
Having this and a larger more capable GF model is a good idea.
*I* wouldn’t buy it. But then that’s not to say that I don’t think the market wouldn’t buy it 😉
An even more compact GF3 would be THE camera to bundle with a new collapsible Lumix zoom. Not everyone will want a prime and the current 14-42 kit lens already looks out of proportion on the GF2. Yes I know Sony bundles over-sized zooms with small bodies, but I don’t think that suits the concept of ultra-compact, large sensor cameras either.
Please, make a ultra-small GF3 and bring a higher quality GF1 successor with all sorts of good stuff. But please don’t give it a GF name, too. This would leas right to naming hell, a thing that Pana avoided nicely up to this point. Although the G named G3 is a step in the wrong direction already.
Why dont they just make a fixed lens GF3 with built in 2-3X zoom.
That would be a good compact to have! 🙂
Interchangeable lenses on a body this small make little sense from portability point of view.
FT5, are u sure !?
Two GF in one year we can have some doubts
It’s a rumors website, you always have to keep your doubts! 🙂
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1041&message=38507666
This is what I want from one of these companies. I don’t care who does it.
I want Olympus or FUji colors, Oly E-pl2 or Fuji X100 body, real solid but small. I want the built in EVF and flash. I want the Panasonic GH2 feature set and video capabilities. I want even more lens selections than we have today in MFT. How about a 6mm, 18mm and 45 low profile sub f2.0 lenses for starters.
Why, because I think Pros want the slip in pocket option for when they are on the go, or want something less intimidation or obvious as a camera to work with clients. We already have big cameras that do almost everything we want, but that little pro level to go camera, that’s sexy and intriguing!
I want new and creative DR and ISO options.
I laid out the body crudely in the link above.
>”A 12mp FX sensor has 72 square microns of light sensing area. A 12mp APS/DX sensor has 30 square microns. A 12mp m4/3 sensor has 18 square microns. In other words, a little more than half the collection area of DX and one quarter that of 35mm full frame.” -Thom
Well put Thom. Simple math then, indicates that if current m43 sensors, and their systems has STAYED to just under 8Mpx, then then would actually have equal, or better, sensor footing to the current 13mpx APS (Nikon, Canon) sensors! However, for their photo-site, area choices, or size, they are doing proportionality better(internal processing?). That’s equal, or better DR, tonal gradations, and color sensitivity. Therefore, arguably the color pallet could be much improved, in JPEG, too.
Did Panasonic and Olympus think that no one would notice, the current m43 sensitivity disadvantages? Please get what I’m saying here, people. 8mpx wouldn’t be noticeable, but by the most picky landscape photographer, who prints only poster (or wall) size prints, and likes to be inches away; looking at the detail. 8Mpx, is a non-issue. Sensitivity is a huge issue.
I note here, the limits, as they are often called, ARE being broken everyday, and I’m not one to decry “physical limits”; even of sensor materials; because one way or another, total IQ will improve. All other things being equal, which competition usually facilitates, then common sense, would start with the more sensitive sensor. [and faster glass together, actually]
All this BS, is because manufactures are trying to give customers what the ignorant wants, and what sounds like better, schooled, business sense. That is, a camera for every demographic. This presumed business method, is doomed to failure, because it’s far more simple, than that. Make the best camera possible, for the price.
You see, real and outstanding photographic benefits, are not all expensive. Some are more costly, and some are not. Some costly things, are not even necessary. However dear consumer please wake up. They are purposely designing cameras with less IQ; to match the price points. No, whether a camera is $200 or $2000, it needs to be the best picture taker, it can be, for the price. We are seeing fancy, and unnecessary design, in lower cost cameras, that take all too noisy, pictures. We are see lack, of some wanted features, hindering the otherwise, most sensitive sensors, in very expensive models. This is all backwards. I say hold off; when you can hardly get the IQ you want, by spending $2000+. They will adapt or die. You must understand; when you get all hot for new camera toy, you are voting, with your wallet, and for how they make our next cameras.
Pixels aren’t bad, unless they compromise other, more important quality. No one wants to tote anything heavy; around their neck. It will be left at home. Even by the “pros”, when out of the studio. Then, all this must be, at a sane price. Really good cameras, are not sanely priced, and they are insanely heavy. Yet, remember, a good photography can put a pin-hole in a cardboard box, and make good pictures. The biggest problem is, people think large amounts of cash will make them a great photographer. It doesn’t.
Keep it real.
I like the conversation here. There are several people who know a lot about cameras, and clearly still have different opinions.
In my opinion, the M43 format has a lot to offer for people like me. I want a better image quality than the Canon S95, but I would not carry around a Nikon D3100, for example, because of the size.
The GF2 fits that bill perfectly, and maybe even the G3. The only reason I don’t already own a GF2 is that the IQ is not good enough. But it is pretty close.
If Panasonic installs the G3 sensor and software in the GF2, and makes no other changes at all, then I will buy one right now. GF2 will still not be a “perfect” camera, but for someone like me, it will be exactly what I wanted.