You can now have a lot of fun by virtually combining the tiny Panasonic GM1 with a lot of FT or MFT lenses using the Special matching Simulator (Click here). Too bad the simulator only shows small size images! To see some bigger images of Gm1 lens combination click over at ePhotozine.
This is also one of the best cameras of the year according to Dpreview:
“Here’s where the GM1 is set apart from other cameras I’ve tested: I want to have it with me, even when I’m heading out of the apartment to run errands, or go to the coffee shop, and I don’t have any specific intentions of Going Shooting. I might just see a nice shot and the GM1 will get it. When I take my DSLR out on these kinds of trips, I’m acutely aware that it’s there the whole time.”
A report about a big GM1 presentation day in Japan can be read at DC.watch (google tranlsation here). New GM1 review at Lesnumeriques (google translation here).
GM1 preorder list:
In US at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto.
In Europe at Amazon Germany, Wex Germany, Amazon UK, Fotohanskeuzekamp, Cyberphoto Sweden and Wex UK.
63 Responses
perfect lenscap for the 100-300, although the 100-300 is really surprisingly light for this size and might even be better on the GM1 than on my GH1, because i got rather poor results with it, probably due to shutter shock.
you see on these images why smaller and smaller mirrorless makes only very little sense….
it looks stupid and more important ergonomics suffer.
Exactly!
This GM1 can be use with practically speaking only 2 lenses, either the 14mm or the 12-32mm. Since these lenses overlap, it is down to one lens. Why not make it a fixed lens camera then, and save more weight and cost?
Olympus 45mm will also be usable.
A small back with GM1 + 12-32, 20mm Pancake and 45mm f/1.8 seems like a nice setup.
the 45mm olympus, the 17mm olympus all look fine on the website linked. As a small 50mm eqv or 35mm eqv it could be a fun camera to take anywhere…or you know just don’t buy it.
The 12mm, 17mm and 45mm Zuikos seem to fit the camera even better than the 14mm (as they have a narrower footprint circle…). The Samyang fisheye and upcoming 15mm Leica, although not available for measurement also would have no problem balancing correctly on the body. So the list of primes that don’t play well with this body doesn’t actually seem to be that long…
They are releasing new lenses everyone month. And Panasonic is leading the charge on compact lenses and now zooms are ridiculously compact. A camera like this is only going to encourage more manufacturers to make smaller lenses. THIS IS A GOOD THING FOR m4/3 no matter what way you look at it.
I do find it ironic that someone on the m4/3 site (and most likely someone who adopted m4/3 platform over a much larger FF system) is on here judging a camera based on size.
Amazing with the 300 2.8:the Gm1 simply disappear beyond the massive front glass element!
Now that’s just silly.
The lenses are huge compared to the body. You still have to lug a lens around with you.
what good does it do that the GM1 is so small?
It’s like carrying a small light ant(hurray!), sitting on a huge elephant(bummer)…
small+big < big+big
If it just took an add-on VF I would be all over it with some of the many small lenses available to MFT (with more on the way with the GM in mind)….but I just can’t use a camera without a VF. …and I agree with you…it is just silly to put a large lens on this camera …especially viewing the LCD only…silly.
Too bad for you.
As of me, I’ll live with that nuisance and get this baby asap bwahahaha!
GM1+Oly75: a dream combo. Just think about it.
“GM1+Oly75: a dream combo. Just think about it.”
Oh, I’ve thought about it…over and over. My Oly 75mm is my favorite lens…and now I’m just waiting on my GM1 to arrive!
I’m also looking forward to shooting some street scenes with the Oly 15mm f8…
Exactly!
Sidetracking a bit, I am baffled at people trying always to fit groundbreaking novelties into their expectations. They seem blind to the unexpected possibilities. I am not talking of the O.P. In particular, but so many photographers are so conservative and preconceived.
it’s like they had a wonderful one-night stand 20 years ago and now they only have eyes for Asian girls -LOL.
+1000
For me it’ll be GM1 + its kit + 20mm f/1.8 + 75mm f/1.8
And just ignore the trolls who don’t like the camera. If they don’t like, shut down and don’t buy it. You have plenty of larger choices, from marginally larger such as the PENs, to much larger such as the GH3 and OM-D’s, to huge such as the Nikons D3x, D4.
Not too bad for me…I use my Black Oly 75mm everyday on my EP5 looking thru the ever-so-beautiful VF4…oh yeah…no monkey shine shooting in bright light for me! I will skip that silliness……:-)
LOL!
No, it’s like carrying a small light ant with a mouse, instead of a horse with an elephant.
The lenses are also relatively small actually.
“You still have to lug a lens around with you.”
You are so right!
From DPReview: “I want to have it with me, even when I’m heading out of the apartment to run errands, or go to the coffee shop, and I don’t have any specific intentions of Going Shooting.”
This is why I am ordering the Stylist 1 with a collapsing lens to serve this purpose & it has a good EVF in it too. The samples so far look pretty good (DPReview & Imaging Resource) & with the constant f/2.8 lens (10.7 X with the same 1/1.7″ sensor as the XZ-2) it should be a nice alternative to taking my full E-M5 kit out.
That should read “Stylus 1”. 😮
So when is the fixed-lens 4/3 coming? January? Olympus, maybe?
I bought a Pen FT a few months ago and I use it like the Dpreview guy uses the GM1, it’s just small enough to never leave at home, I used to think the EM5 and the 20mm were like that, but smaller is just better for always having the camera with you. The GM1 with the 20 or the Oly 17 is just a killer combo.
This is wat M43 should be and its the only way they can survive. Small camera’s and lenses for under 500 euro prices. Thats a good compromise against the APSC and FF range. Small, cheap with decent picture quality.
My E-P5 blows away my D7000 in terms of IQ and AF performance, and it holds up really well with my 6D.
Owning a camera from each format, if I had to stay with only one I’d keep the E-P5. So what’s your point exactly? Micro four thirds is great. It is easier to design good MFT lenses. It is easier to design good MFT sensors. That’s why the system wins.
The problem is that people don’t understand the equivalency equation and fall into either of two traps: the relative aperture myth on small sensors, or the high-ISO myth on large sensors. And then they go online and defend their choice ad infinitum.
For instance, 25mm f/1.4 ISO 400 on MFT should be compared to 50mm f/2.8 ISO 1600 on full frame. If you do equivalence you have to pull it through all the way: focal length, aperture and ISO sensitivity. Think about it: you can project the exact same amount of photons on a large sensor as on a small sensor, you just have to concentrate the cone of light to the size of the sensor.
Heck, if you place a half-frame sensor at half the distance between the focal point and the full frame sensor, it will capture the *exact same photons*. That’s why speed boosters work.
Taking the full equivalence equation into account, all systems become awfully similar, and the only big differences come down to lens design. And micro four thirds just happens to have a *stellar* collection of lenses. It is *the* system for digital.
Full frame once catered to pros because sensors were not efficient, and now it just caters to people who think with their ego and not with their brain.
Mike, whats your point? Telling a lie about M43 picture Quality?
M43 was invented as a compromise for smaller gear at a reasonable price with decent picture quality. Today they are trying guys like you to believe that the picture quality is as good as APSC or FF and that you need big “pro”: expensive stuff like the EM1. M43 is killing them self and i don’t like it. I Iove the small cheap M43 stuff but those lenses for 1000 euro and camera’s for 1400 euros are just a joke. For that kind of money you could buy FF or really good small APSC which outperform M43 easily. People like you who are blinded by the M43 light and telling just lies about performance. Please keep it real.
Camera’s like the GM1 are good products from M43. Those super expensive gear are just a joke.
Buy a FF for 1400 euros and a 24-70mm f2.8 for 1000 euros. You are a clown like always.
Nikon D600 is close to that price, and in fact, in my country, selling for less than E-M1! And the 24-85 VR has thinner DOF and is much cheaper than the Olympus 12-40/2.8. So who is the clown here?
@Viezevure……m43 is a compromise, sure. As are all other camera formats, which you don’t seem to “get”. Another thing you don’t seem to “get” is the concept of “good enough”. And each user can define this for themselves, they don’t need a prat like you to define it for them. Good for you that you like the cheap m43 stuff. So do I. I also like that I can buy an expensive camera like the E-M1, and it will take my cheap lenses like the 14/2.5….or an expensive lens like the 12-40/2.8. And shoot sports (well enough for my purposes).
After 3 years with an E-PL1, my home is covered in prints, small and large, that blow friends away. That’s good enough for me. Please share with us what “good enough” is for you, how do you test the actual ability of each format for your purposes? One format “outperforming” another is a meaningless statement, unless you put it in context. Otherwise you’re simply measurebating, eventually (perhaps already?) you’ll go blind…….
Actually, it was “full frame” that was invented as a compromise for smaller gear at a reasonable price with decent picture quality.
Is the image quality between micro Four-Thirds and APS-C so huge as to be indistinguishable at most print sizes, including Super A3? No.
If APS-C was so much better than micro Four-Thirds, why are most APS-C camera bodies standard ISO sensitivity range limited to 6400? At the same pixel densities, there is little advantage to using APS-C…or any other format. When Four-Thirds and micro Four-Thirds sensors were more crowded than APS-C, there was a significant advantage, but that’s all changed.
He’s right, you’re wrong, if you want EXACT the same look in the image. Study optics before talking: http://www.sansmirror.com/articles/pick-a-size.html
If you want something DIFFERENT, that m43 is better (if you want more DOF) or larger sensor is better (if you want less DOF).
I laugh like made today that people want super shallow DOF, when in the film era they complained that they didn’t have enough DOF. I guess humans wants always something different from what they have 🙂
Shallow DOF is good if you want shallow DOF and you have the time to focus properly.
Otherwise it’s a curse.
The E-M1 has a better sensor than the pro 7D and the advanced 70D, both APS-C bodies. So yes, you are right, MFT is a much better option compared to APS-C. And it has better lenses than DX and EF-S counterparts (few will use L lenses on APS-C bodies). FF DSLR will became a niche. The future of FF is A7/A7r!
Not again, another of your baseless m43 is better than (fill in the blank..). The sensor on my EM-5 is no better than my 7D but about the same. At the highest ISO Canon is less noisy but loses on dynamic range. I’ve seen nothing to suggest that the EM-1 is significantly better, and any difference in the number of pixels is a wash. Let’s talk about the “Oly lenses being better than EF-S lenses”. There is only one prime from Canon, their 60mm macro which is every bit as good as the 60mm from Oly (I have both). Oly offers weathersealing but the Canon is much quicker to focus and obviously I can use it for continuous focus which is a joke on the EM-5. The super wide angle zooms(10-22mm EF-S vr 9-18mm Zuiko) are optically very similar (again I own both but sold my Canon last week). The Oly is smaller but the Canon offers a wider field of view and is faster. The fast standards, Canon’s 17-55/2.8 vrs Oly 12-40 is clearly a win for Oly. The few teles from both sides are pretty tempid affairs, but Canon’s 55-250mm is much better optically than Oly’s existing 40-15mm at the longer focal lengths (again I have both). I don’t know much about the longer zooms but I cannot see one being any better then the other. So we are left with the cheap & cheerful kits lenses, and again there is little to distinguish between these lenses. So despite your baseless claim (for Canon at least) the comparable Oly lenses are no better than their Canon EF-S counterparts, true you get the benefit of size from Oly, that is why I use Oly for everything except bird photography where the Canon excels. Try sticking with facts in future.
Cupid, you’re forgetting about the primes and pancake primes. These are the reason that so many people like m4/3. What’s the equivalent of panasonics 20mm f1.7 in DX format? Or Olys 45mm f1.8?? On the teeny 12mm f2.5??? Right, there isn’t one.
Sorry I meant EF-S, but same difference…
Notice that Andrei says “counterparts” so I was comparing like with like. I’m tired of people talking shit about stuff they doesn’t own. I have the 14, 20 & 25 from Panny & the 45 from Oly. All great lenses and some will be even better on a GM1
The only honest reason to favor mFT is down to size and weight any thing else is either confusion { F2.8 does not do the same job on different formats} or fanboy nonsense. Any Nikon, or Pentax or Sony APS user has a choice of many cameras that easily outperform the image quality of mFT often at a far lower price.
It’s a great sensor, but you are dreaming. Even the professional reviews say it’s “almost as good” as APS-C at best. Let’s not even compare these sensors to FF. They aren’t close.
As an owner of both the EM-1 and D7000, I can tell you that the EM1 has the best 4/3 sensor. Still doesn’t beat the performance and DR of the 3(?) year old. It’s clear as day in real use. Let’s not let Oly pride get in the way of reality.
The Canon sensor is 3 years old. So, yes, in those three years, there have been new techniques, the E-M1 sensor is better, but the Canon sensor has a less dense design, so (all things equal and they’re not really) it should be better in low light.
Yikes. You’re wrong, about basic optical principles, which you could pick up from any introductory photography book. The relative depth of field goes the other way. The smaller the sensor is, the larger the aperture needs to be to provide the same depth of field as a larger format camera.
As far as I got it he was not talking about depth of field but about the amount of light. Depth of field is actually working for and against you on a FF camera, depending on what you are trying to archieve. If you want a portrait on a 50mm, small depth of Field can be helpful, but too small an if you dont do it right the nose will be sharp and the eye already out of your field… On a FF that is. So while bokeh in the background is a nice effect, it might hinder you on getting everything you want into focus. On a smaller sensor, lets say in available light shooting the greater depth of field on a F1.4 will get you more in focus on a smaller sensor while using the same ISO, 800 should be enough for slow moving subjects and in that ISO image quality is not such a factor, as on a big one. Combine that With the superior Oly IBIS and you might very well have yourself quite an argument why some M43 gear is performing better for you in low light than a FF. Just saying 🙂
And then there is price. The EM5 with a pany 20mm 1.7 and a oly 45mm 1.8, both great lenses will set you back about 1300 euros nowadays. Now go and find me a DSLR that has the same featureset.
Not to mention that an electronic Viewfinder has quite a view adavntages over an optical one in low light. Like it is simply lighter, allows more additional information and things like digital zoom to get your focus right with manual lenses etc.
Lets see, you own three systems. You are a gear addict who focuses more time with their zoom tool looking at meaningless things rather than taking photographs. You just wrote a long paragraph that means nothing. Who cares. You talk about ego but you are the one who appears to have an inflated opinion about a persons worth because of the type of camera, a meaningless item,a person uses
lol the E-P5 does not blow away the D7000 it doesn’t even equal it. A few of your fellow fantards may accept your BS .For the rest there are RAW files all over the net that show just how wrong you are. As for AF you can only be talking of static S-AF as for any other type of AF the E-P5 sucks
What lens is shown on the far right? Does it read “12.5”?
Its that horrible 3D lens they produced a while back and no one bought…
Aaah, sure… thanks 🙂
I plan to pick up my GM-1 today. It is available at Sammy’s in the US. Seems like BH says mid-Dec but it is arriving in USA now at other shops.
Ah I’d missed your comment somehow – thanks for the tip about Samy’s! Just ordered one from there 🙂
Let’s dream
gm1 size, more compact fixed prime lense 17mm F2.0, 43rd BSI full readout sensor, avc/H.265 support, 5axis IBIS, FULL manual control in video as well, slim full articluted screen, weather seald, this is enough for me, what about U?
Any thoughts on the best place to pre-order this in the US? I originally ordered from Panasonic directly because the estimated ship date was listed as today, but I called them and they told me it was “backordered” and they had no ETA.
Amazon usually seems like a good bet but they have a warning about being unable to meet demand up on their page…
Why, it’s in stock. Read above.
LOL, the lens comparisons are pretty funny. The GF1 is not geared toward people who will use those lenses regularly. I can, however, see someone with a larger m43 camera using this as a back-up if something went wrong. The handling would be way less than ideal with the larger lenses. Not to mention that it defeats the purpose of this camera. It’s designed to be “pocketable.” The kit lens and a couple of primes like the 14, 17 and 20’s will work nicely. I argue even the 12, 25 and 45’s are already getting a little big on it, but easily manageable, just not quite as pocketable. As far as the 60, 75 and the other zooms, this body doesn’t really work on a regular basis.
Just my opinion….
Just toss the GM1 in a leather pouch with a 9-18, 20 & 45 and you have a formidable street photography kit that weighs practically nothing!
OK,the GM1/100-300 combo looks ludicrous – but what about this one:
http://camerasize.com/compact/#486.342,ha,t
Does it look any better?
(more to the point: can you carry it?)
Where are the 2 black magic micro four thirds cameras in the lens matching web site?
Just picked one up. One major flaw I see is that the marking on the mode dial are almost unreadable. The shiny silver hides the really poor grey writing. I mean almost impossible to read. What were they thinking? They may have just left it blank!
Wow – do most people ever miss the point! The GM1 is a brilliant little camera, and a great travelling companion with its specially designed compact lens set which will roll out over the next few years. These lenses are slower, because that is the only way that they can be compact (although some fast primes are also good companions, such as the 20mm f1.7). Slower lenses are less and less of an issue as sensors becomes more efficient in using the light that is focussed on them. When I was packing big Nikon F cameras and lenses I also always had a Rollei 35 handy, for those times you could not use the heavy gear. So don’t diss this little camera, as it is going to be an important player for the m43 platform.
I agree 110%. There was no reason to make the writing illegible though. Everything else seems great and this will be my most used camera. So far its great.
Indeed. Since the 16 Mpx sensor I find myself very comfy with any 2.8 pancake. Check*Matching Simulation* for the GM1: it is a match made in heaven.
Only question I have is how Panny runs Auto-ISO: is it the Sunny 16 rule like Oly?
People seem unable to keep two simple concepts at the same time in their brain. If you can go noiseless up to 1600 ISO and with tolerable DR, what else do you need? I’d say: pocketability.
With a pancake you then have a powerful ‘reality analyser’ , always with you, that will never scare away anybody. It’s not a replacement for an OM-D, but I can see it getting even more use in my daily routine.
A user above noted that in ILC you can change body, not only lens. Scalability is a top advantage in m4/3. Why not make use of it?
Learn to use the sensor advantage, not only the lens.
+10
I bet the GM1 brings a lot of new users into the M4/3 universe. Once people get a taste, then look around at the diversity of M4/3 camera and lens offerings… who knows?
The gm1 is impressively small. but it’s still thick with a lens. not much less thick than other m43 options. i’ve been curiously looking at a sony nex with their 20mm pancake. about the same thickness with the added bonus of a grip and a flippy lcd, which i would personally find very useful.
You are right, it is thick and only goes into a large pocket because of this. It is low weight and small though.