Traditonal DSLR or Mirrorless?
Let me start by saying I think traditional Digital Single Lens Reflex (DSLR) will be in serious decline over the next few years. With an electronic viewfinder and high speed contrast autofocus mirrorless cameras will match the performance of their traditional dslr counterparts at the same format size. They will also offer benefits that can't be matched in a traditional dslr in terms of size, weight, and lens cost. The lens cost advantage comes from not being constrained to have light hit the sensor without distortion, as the distortion can be corrected digitally without any loss. The 14mm lens here is a perfect example. It is very small, light, and relatively cheap. With this lens if you took a picture of a rectangular grid and looked at the unprocessed raw file you'd see the grid lines bend in an arc, but you'll never see that lens distortion because the processed raw files, in camera jpegs, and view screen automatically adjust and bring the distortion back to imperceptible. If size and weight of camera and lenses aren't a factor for you then a traditional dslr from Canon or Nikon or one of the others may be a better choice for you. I've always thought the best camera is the one you have with you, and you are more likely to have the mirrorless camera with you because it is smaller and lighter.
Which Mirrorless System?
So if you want to get into Mirroless which system should you go with? Currently there are three choices. Sony's NEX system, Samsung NX system, or Olympus & Panasonic's micro 4/3 systems. The Sony and Samsung systems use the aps-c image sensor size that traditional dslrs use but use incompatible mounts. That large image sensor means they will have great low light performance, but each of those two systems have a single manufacturer and a limited set of lenses. What's the point of having replaceable lenses if you don't have a good selection of lenses to choose from? Micro 4/3rds by contrast has been around longer and has two camera manufacturers dedicated to the format and more lens manufacturers. Both Olympus's and Panasonic's mirrorless camera linueps are larger than either Sony's or Samsung's, while their lenses are compatible. So with micro 4/3rds you avoid vendor lock in while getting a much larger selection of cameras and lenses. The only downside to the micro 4/3rds format is the image sensor is a little smaller than aps-c, which results in less optimal low light performance that is noticeable at high iso values. The GF2 for instance gets noticeably grainy at ISO 1600 and above, while the GF2 and G3 do a little better at high iso their performance is still only as good as the most basic canon or nikon models.
Which Micro 4/3rds Camera?
If you are looking for a more traditional dslr like performance and shape the Panasonic G3 is a good intro level camera with quite impressive performance in a relatively small package and the GH2 is a great camera capable of recording broadcast quality hd video. Olympus doesn't make a pro pro-level dslr like micro 4/3rds yet. They do make a traditional 4/3rds camera but it is generally considered overpriced and it won't work with the micro 4/3rds lenses. Keep an eye out because Olympus will likely introduce a micro 4/3rds dslr style camera at some point in the future.
If you are looking for a smaller rangefinder style camera to save even more space and weight Olympus offers the EP1, EP2, EPL1, and EPL2 and Panasonic offers the GF2. You could also pick up a Panasonic GF1 on ebay as it is now discontinued. None of these come with a viewfinder, but they all have an optional viewfinder you can put in the flash hotshoe area instead of a flash. Olympus' also offer a bluetooth module that can be inserted in the flash hotshoe to sync with your computer and social media. And of course you can use the flash hot-shoe for an actual flash.
An interesting thing to note about Olympus is none of their lenses have in-lens image stabilization and instead rely on in-camera image stabilization. This means any lens used with their cameras, including the pancake primes, will be stabilized regardless of the lens. It also means any of their lenses, like their very nice collapsible zoom lenses, used with a Panasonic camera will work fine but won't have image stabilization. The GF2 is the smallest of the lot, has a built in flash (some of the Olympus lineup don't), and has probably the best kit lens. What you give up with the GF2 compared to the other rangefinder style cameras is a physical control wheel, external mic port, in body lens stabilization (they rely on in lens stabilization for lenses that support it), no remote trigger support, and well not much else. The GF2 is amazing! I don't know how they fit all that performance in such a tiny package. Some GF1 users have complained about the removal of the wheel and move to more controls via the touchscreen interface. I was a little nervous about that too, but after having used the camera for a few months I can say the touch screen is brilliant. They still have some nice physical controls on the back and 3 buttons on the top and I've never once thought to myself "I wish there was a button or wheel for that" when doing something via the touchscreen in conjunction with those physical buttons. It's a well though out interface. Of course I'm the kind of guy who hasn't bought the optional digital viewfinder either, so your mileage may vary.
A note on select micro 4/3rds lenses:
Panasonic 14mm f/2.5 - I've read all the reviews and lived with this lens awhile and I have to say I love it. With this lens on the GF2 I can fit the camera in my pocket, and regularly walk around with the camera in my pocket on days I plan to take a lot of photos. It does bulge quite a bit in my pocket, and with some pants it is even a bit of a tight fit, but it is very doable. On my recent trip as a tourist to Boston I threw this comfortably in the front pocket of my dockers and wandered around town getting great images and didn't have to carry it on a strap around my neck or in a backpack. With some of my tighter fitting jeans I'll find myself putting it in my pocket when walking around and taking it out and setting it on the table or ground when I sit down so I'm more comfortable. It's not quite a compact camera and some people may decide it's too big to carry in their pockets, but for me it crossed the line to pocketable. The performance is quite good too, crisp sharp images across the range. The Panasonic 14mm is 28mm equivalent in 35mm film terms, so it's a nice wide angle lens but not so wide you can't use it for normal street photography. The only downsides to this lens are that you can get a wider aperture with the 20mm lens, and there is no in-lens image stabilization.
Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 - This was the kit lens on the GF1 and is still available for purchase on its own. If you don't need to pocket your camera/lens combo this is just a smidge larger than the 14mm. For that smidge extra size you get a prime lens (20mm) that is a smidge better for a lot of situations, has a smidge better sharpness, and most importantly a noticeably wider aperture. The 20mm lens is loved by all who use it.
Panasonic 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 - You can get the gf2 with this as the kit lens, and it's available as the kit lens on the G2/G3/GH2 as well. It's main advantages are that it is cheap, performs pretty well in most situations, has a range useful for most situations, and has in lens image stabilization. However, at 14mm it isn't as sharp as the 14mm prime and doesn't have as large of an aperture. It's also just a little less sharp at every setting than the older 14-45mm it replaced. It also has lower build quality with less metal and more plastic components compared to the old 14-45mm. It is $150 cheaper than the old 14-45mm lens.
Panasonic 14-45mm f/3.5-5.6 - No longer available as a camera bundle this lens is a great all rounder. The specs are almost identical to the newer 14-42mm, but sharpness is a smidge better all around and the build quality is better with more metal and less plastic. The real question you have to ask is it $150 better? I personally decided it was worth it and upgraded to this over the 14-42mm.
Panasonic 45-200mm f/4.0-5.6 - Obviously made to complement the 14-42 or 14-45 lens this is an affordable zoom lens that performs well for it's price.
Panasonic 14-140mm f/4.0-5.8 - If you do casual video like recording your daughters choir performance any of the normal photo lenses are fine and you will get beautiful hd video. However, if you do serious video you need a lens like this. What sets this lens apart are its silent continuous autofocus and ability to do continuous incremental aperture adjustment, all while changing the zoom level. That level of control is the kind of thing you need if you plan to use the GH2 to shoot a professional TV show in hd or to make an indie movie that will be shown at film festivals. If you use this lens just for still photography it probably isn't worth the price.
Panasonic 45mm f/2.8 - we are now firmly out of the intro price lenses and firmly into lenses that cost more than your camera body. But if you do a lot of macro photography or portraits this is a beautiful lens and you do get what you pay for.
Olympus 17mm f/2.8 - Olympus usually makes fine lenses but this is one exception. The 14mm and 20mm Panasonic are sharper, faster focusing, and have wider apertures. The Panasonic 14mm is also smaller. A lot of people with Olympus cameras are mounting the Panasonic 14mm or 20mm to get the Olympus in camera image stabilization with the all around better Panasonic lens.
on February 23, 2011
I just got my GF2 today. This is going to be a preliminary review after a few poking around. I still need more time to play with it a bit more to get the best out of it. However, I just want to give some information to people who want to get this camera. Some information is better than no information at all, right? So please don't throw bricks on me for reviewing an item I just have for a few hours.
Before I get this camera, I did quite some extensive research on it. Let's talk about the cons people concern about. The major complaints for this camera are that:
1. The mode dial on top has been removed compared to the GF1.
I think I don't miss the mode dial for one. I own another DSLR camera with all the mode dials and bottons here and there. Yes, it gives you the convenience. However, my purpose of getting this camera is because of its small size so that I can bring it out more often than the big DSLR, not to mention all the attention the big DSLR draws. I want to practice photography, not mode dialing! By the way, the mode dial is replaced by a big icon, be it "M" "S" "A", etc. on the upper left corner of the screen. One touch of that icon lets you choose any mode you want. So all you miss is a tweak of the dial from a touch of the screen.
2. The touch screen is not so sensitive
Yes, and no. First of all, I put a screen protector Lexerd - Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF2 TrueVue Anti-glare Digital Camera Screen Protector (Dual Pack Bundle)on it. I am not sure if that will affect it at all. The screen protector works quite well. It is very easy to apply. I found that the touch screen is quite sensitive when you try to make selections by poking on the screen with your fingers, but it is less sensitive when you try to slide your finger across the screen, such as when you try to move to the next picture or zoom into the pictures. To me, it is totally acceptable. After all, if you don't like to use the touch screen, you can ALWAYS use the navigation buttons on the right hand side to make the selection. In another word, touch screen is OPTIONAL. It gives you faster access to commands.
There is a switch between on/off to turn on the camera. You can not confuse it from the shutter release. There is a specific video recording button (smaller) separated from the shutter release (bigger). There is only one dial located at the upper right corner on the back of the camera for controlling shutter speed and aperture. You switch between the two by a simply press of the rear dial. I like the design for its simplicity. The flash work quite well. The way that it pops up high is probably specifically designed that it is a little further from the lens so that you don't get red eye images so easily. The only thing I don't like is the HDMI/AV out socket cover. It seems to be a little flimsy and it might break easily if I bend it too much.
I took some high iso images. It seems like the iso800 is my breaking point for images with acceptable noise. At 1600, you can see prominent noise, and softness probably from the noise suppression of the cpu. I have not had time to try everything, so I can not comment on the sharpness of the images at different setting. Given that it is a 4/3rd, you can not expect it to be as good as a full frame or apc-s camera.
I tried the video mode a little. The view is very static during shooting. In the old days, a slight shake of the video camera will give you a pretty bad shaking of the video frame. This camera seems to do the job well for stablizing the frame at first view. It will auto focus on objects you center your frame on.
About its size, you can not fit this camera into your jean pocket or any shirt pockets like compact p&s do. You can probably fit it into a pocket of a jacket. In case if you think you can slip it into your back pocket or anything, forget it! Without the 14mm pancake, you can probably do it, but with the pancake on, there is no way. However, it is still way better than carrying a big dslr and its gears!
Overall, I really like the camera so far. The controls are simple. Picture quality is reasonable. I will have to do more shooting to find out more about this camera.
Update: About the white balance, I am pleasantly surprised that this camera allows you to adjust the color temperature by degree of kelvins, on top of the traditional preset WB scenes. Personally, I prefer to set the white balance by the degree of kelvins because you can exert finer control on the color temperature. If you use live view, you can even see how the color temperature on the live view changes with your adjustment. It is a very helpful function!
update: 2/25/2011, played with the video capture function. There are 4 different video quality choices for each of the two formats JEPG video and AVCHD. You will need special software or the software that comes with the camera to play the AVCHD format. With the motion JEPG, you can play it off the memory card. If you want to send your friends/family the video clips, you may want to capture it with the motion JEPG so that they can play it with any computer. Almost all of the different choices of video quality yielded great to reasonable video quality except the lowest quality choice of all, the QVGA setting from the motion JEPG format. At a close distance, people's faces are quite blurry in this setting that it basically render the video almost useless. You can kind of expect this because all the other settings will require 2gb for a record time varying from 8 to 20 minutes, while the QVGA can run for 1 hour with 2gb memory.
update: 2/26/2011, CHANGE MY RATING TO 4 STARS, took some pictures outside at bright sunlight, clear sky with iso 200 with the 14mm pancake at around 10am in the morning. The pictures have great resolution. However, the white balance is definitely off by about 1000-1500k. The normal color temperature range of sunlight under clear sky is about 6000k-6500k. Under 6000k, you can clearly see the white balance is off and a blue color cast across the images. By adjusting to 7500k, the blue cast will go away and give you the natural warm color. This confirms the in depth review on dpreview.com suggesting the off white balance to the cooler side with this camera with the JEPG output from the camera. The effect is quite obvious, although it can be resolved by adjusting the color temperature about 1500k higher. So far, this has been my biggest complaint about this camera. If the effect is so obvious, the GF2 quality control team should have clearly saw it and solved the problem. Luckily the effect is not irreversible. For this reason, I will give the camera a 4 star rating. About the software "photofunstudio" that comes with the camera for editing pictures, all I can say is, I hate this software! Compared to the Nikon ViewNX, which is not such a great image editing software by itself already, this software is a piece of !@#$! Before the software can let you do editing and give you all the information about the images including aperture, focal length, WB, etc., it goes through a "registration" step. The problem is, this "registration" step takes forever! What I mean forever is something like a good 20 minutes for 10 images! Guess how long it will take for 100 images! May be it will be faster for someone who has a more powerful computer! But the Nikon viewNX does the same thing in about 2 minutes or less in the same computer! However, I have to say, the software has nothing to do with the camera itself!
on March 6, 2011
So I have been waiting for this camera for a very long time since it was announced. It seemed like it took forever to get to the US market. I was in the market for a better 'carry around' camera since our P&S was lost. I didn't want to buy another P&S and wanted something better to more photos that were 'keepers'. I was tired of the P&S cameras taking forever to focus, lack of manual settings, and the slow shutters. I read into the 4/3s format and was sold. I went with the GF2 because of the reviews and I got a deal on it. I came from a Canon SD990 which I loves but is now lost and have a Canon 7D. Carrying around a SLR body just wasn't going to happen either. Instead of writing a whole summary, I'll just list out the good and bad about this camera.
1. Small enough to carry around
2. All the manual features you need
3. Has pop up flash unlike the EPL-2 and Nex5
4. I like the touchscreen, some will hate it, but I don't think it's too bad.
5. Great selection of lens
7. Fast focus
8. Menu is fairly customizable
1. Not small enough to be pocketable
2. Flash not useful most of the time. Can hold down to use as popup flash, but have found that depending on room, it produces a odd washed out brown hue
3. Not the best in low light conditions. This needs about 2 stops up to keep up with the same SLR shutter in the same shot
4. No real exposure compensation using dial. It just bumps up/down the shutter/aperature
5. Some washed out colors/shots. Many of the shots lacked contrast
6. Flash take a few seconds to recycle. Don't expect to take 2 pics back to back using flash within a second or so of each other
7. Battery life is weak. Need to charge after two days of occasional use
Coming from a P&S, you might give this 5 stars, but coming from a SLR experience, you'd give this 3 stars, but for what it is and knowing it's limits, I'd give this 4 stars based on speed, sharpness, portability, and useability. It just lacks better low light performance the and color accuracy. An Image Stabilizer would have been great on this camera. Most indoor shots will come out blurry due to movement of object or camera shake since you have to be on a fairly low shutter. All in all, I would recommend it, but wouldn't mind trying the EP-L2 or Nex5.
on March 5, 2011
After 2 months of searching for a small DSLR quality camera I finally found the one I want. The GF2 meets my expectations for a small, simple, high quality camera with great still and video. I tried the E-PL2; took it back because iAuto mode produced warm yellow pics in indoor lighting. I tried the Nex5; took it back because the images were way too soft, my point-and-shoot took sharper pictures. Both the E-PL2 and Nex5 can produce good images if you mess with settings, but the GF2 in iAuto mode is simply better. White objects, such as an closet doors, actually come out white with the GF2. I know that sounds like a simple statement, but you would not believe the trouble other cameras have producing whites and light colors in low light. The E-PL2 and Nex5 have better noise quality at high ISO, but in general I found that I kept more of the pics using the GF2 especially the indoor shots. And by the way, when I test cameras I do not use tripods and fancy lighting, I just shoot real life situations.
The touchscreen works OK, not great. Enough said.
The video looks really nice. Not as good as a Hollywood HD movies, but better than most camcorders I have had. Warning, even though it uses AVCDH compression, the video files are still huge. Plan on killing a day editing clips and creating dvds if you shoot more then an hour of video.
The GF2 does not produce as good of a picture as my cousins high end $2000 DSRL, but it is much better than a point-and-shoot. Professionals probably should not get the GF2, but prosumers (like me) will love it.
on February 21, 2011
The new touch screen is not like the smooth glass of an iPhone, just a plastic, resistive panel that feels hollow when tapped. I could live with it, but my left hand fingers keep getting in the way and end up changing the focus point. Also, if you are changing a setting with the buttons, try not to touch the screen. I need to investigate if the touch can be disabled.
Another issue with the controls when using the zoom lens is that my right thumb tends to hit the playback button frequently since it is closer to the thumb-pad now. It was not in this location on the GF1. My ZS7 and FZ35 have very nice controls and Q.Menu button works well in those cameras. The control pad buttons also seems to stick out more than other Panasonic cameras, which cause inadvertent presses. This camera is basically uncomfortable to hold with normal size hands.
The 14mm pancake kit is still made in Japan with a metal mount, but the new 14-42mm is all plastic with cheaper build quality. The 14mm kit lens is very sharp edge to edge. Very compact. The 14-42mm seems to have soft focus at the wide end (14-20mm), but is pretty sharp at the tele-end out to 42mm. It's not made in Japan so maybe this creates a bias, but this lens cannot compete with the older and sharper 14-45mm that came with the GF1.
The GF2 appears to have better exposure when using the built-in flash in indoor lighting. The GF1 tended to underexposed when using the flash. Perhaps this is a result of the GF2 flash moving forward.
Overall IQ seems to be similar to the GF1 with some improvement when using the built-in flash.
The IQ seems to best when keeping it below ISO 400. I did notice more yellow colors in shots taken with interior lighting in comparison to the Canon G12. My ZS7/FZ35 seem more red. Nothing really too noticeable. Overall I find the 14mm a bit too wide whereas the 20mm seemed just right. In good lighting (outdoors) it can match IQ of a DSLR, but not in low light.
Panasonic took a great camera (the GF1) and made the next rev technically better, but paired it with lesser glass and forgot about the user experience when handling the camera. Sadly, the F in GF no longer stands for fun. The GF had a place between care free point-shoots and the serious DSLRs, but with the issues I noted, it doesn't make sense for me if it's not enjoyable. While I have a lot of Canons, I really enjoy Lumix cameras and one of my favorites is the DMC-FZ35. I would recommend you find a store that carries the GF2 before buying.
on November 26, 2011
I am so torn on the Panasonic GF2. Ive always wanted its predecessor the GF1, now a classic in the world of digital rangefinder cameras, due to it being fun to use with high quality results, robust build quality, and a good combo of automatic and manual functions. But I was NOT willing to pay the rip-off prices asked here and on eBay for a dated digital camera. So I settled on the GF2 as my introduction to M4/3. I should add I am a professional shooter that has been doing this for nearly 4 decades. In addition to assorted professional Olympus bodies and glass, and the outstanding XZ-1, I own other Panny Lumix products like the DMC-LX5 and the DMC-TS3 so I expect and get consistent quality from these outstanding Japanese-made products and their sublime Leica-sourced optics.
(I should also add I bought the GF2 body and a Lumix 20mm F1.7 pancake lens and 14-45 zoom separately).
First the positives: this Japanese-made camera, when mated with the 20mm pancake, is portability defined, and it takes excellent RAW captures. I shoot in RAW exclusively, and most of the time in either Aperture priority or manual mode. It is fairly intuitive, with an easy-to-grasp menu system. With the pancake focus is fast, as long as you're not pointing it at low-contrast areas, but you always have a manual focus option. The end results are outstanding. Build quality is VERY robust, all metal and battery life is pretty good. Plus the tripod mount is center with the focal plane, a big plus for panoramas. Video I have no idea because I am NOT a video shooter. But....
Now the negatives. I really thought I could do without the mode dial, but I guess I cannot, and after using this camera I dont like having to go to the fiddly-diddly touch screen to change modes and make adjustments that could be done if this camera had a a mode dial and more programmable FN buttons (it has one). Weird, because my Olympus E3s have no mode dials, but Im OK with that. But this is minor compared to the not-well-thought-out, and always active, touch screen interface.
After 3 months, I absolutely despise the touch screen interface. Why? Well, for one thing, unless the GF2 is switched off, it's ALWAYS active, even in sleep mode (SEE UPDATE BELOW). For example, if you have the camera on sleep mode, and if the touch screen has made contact with your shirt or vest, it activates and goes to the touch-focus mode where you then have to set your focus point, hit set, then take the picture--too much to do here that's unnecessary, to the point you could miss a quick picture. Plus it could be taking dozens of pics w/o knowing so just by bumping your chest (hopefully Panny is listening and a firmware update will include a disable option).
Also, why O WHY would Panasonic make the mem card/battery access door out of flimsy plastic, where it feels like it's going to break every time you open it, and the rest of the camera is all-metal?
Now, sure enough, Panasonic has introduced the Japanese-made GX1, due to hit the stores in December. This is being touted as the true successor to the GF1. Maybe they listened to advanced shooters who like me "settled" for the GF2 and were disappointed in how these cameras were dumbed down for the consumer market. Specs for the GX1 are impressive: basically, it's a GF1 with a better hand grip, the innards (16mp sensor and Venus processing engine, full 1080p video, the Supersonic Wave dust sensor cleaning system inherited from Olympus, a mode dial, FOUR programmable FN buttons, a remote cable release socket the GF2 does not have, a vertical/horizontal level, a new and much-improved (optional) electronic view finder, and a Touch-Screen interface that has the same features of the GF2, but can be FULLY DISABLED IF YOU WISH. Yeah!!!!
In conclusion 4 stars is the average, because while this camera takes outstanding 5-star RAW photos that stand up to professional standards--even pushing up to ISO 800 (I attribute most of this to the outstanding 20mm pancake that's a jewel, a 5-star lens)--getting there can be a huge pain in the rear. If I would assign stars on the interface, there would only be 3: it's just too weird and automatic--and too autocratic--for pros/enthusiasts who like more manual control. That it cannot be disabled is this otherwise fine camera's tech albatross.
UPDATE: Well, I did find a way to disable the touch screen. When I bought my LX5 I also purchased the LVF-1 Electronic Viewfinder. Although it is not the highest-res evf, it does its job OK and is compatible with the GF2. Attach the evf and the touch screen goes out (you can switch back and forth). So while I may purchase the GX1 when it's finally released, I think that now I'll hang onto the GF2 as a spare, for really it is not that bad of a camera once you get past its quirks.
on March 20, 2011
I did the research and concluded that I wanted the Panasonic/Lumix four-thirds system. I have always shot w/ Canon SLR and DSLR products. I ventured into the point and shoot area with the Lumix LX-3 (found it to be exceptional)and this is why I purchased the GF2. This will be brief because I just purchased the camera. My impressions:
1. Very nice camera body/handsome and solid/ I was really impressed. 2. The touch screen set-up is fun to work with and I do not find it cheap on any level 3. The kit lens 14 - 45 is cheap, but it will be fine until I purchase the 45 -200, which is beautiful. 4. I purchased the live view finder and appreciate it as far as it goes. Very helpful in bright sunlight (shop around b/c the price spread is substantial) 5. The shutter is noisy compared to my Canon 40 D, which of course, I anticipated. 6. The camera sports the Lumix iA and creative scene modes, which are just as fine here as they are on the LX-3. 7. The video is outstanding although I did not purchase the camera for this purpose. I have shot about 200 photos and the resolution/color in all modes, iA through manual is impressive. 8. I have not tested the ISO limits for noise. Conclusions, so far: The format is fun, interesting and of great assistance to me b/c I have arthritis, and using my larger DSLR cameras is sometimes difficult.I appreciate the overall quality of the higher end Lumix brand. Ease of operation for me is based upon my work with the LX-3. This being said, beware of the horrible operating instructions on the enclosed CD. The instruction book for the LX-3 was terrible to the point that I purchased an excellent book on the camera. If you do not have any association with the Lumix brand, you will want to pull out your hair when attempting to navigate this on-line instruction book. Otherwise, if you want a very nice and fun alternative to the old point and shoot, and/or taking along the DSLR for every outing, take a good look at this little gem. More later when I get to test the nuts and bolts of the camera. It is not perfect, but think about it, that is subjective, and if any camera was a perfect camera, where would that put the manufacturers who just love to advertise the latest and greatest every month!
on August 26, 2011
I have used a quite a different level of camera for the last 10 years. Recently, it was the Canon G12 and Pentax K10 with F1.4 prime lens. Pentax DSLR is not bad, it focus the fastest out of the 3. However, it is too bulky and a little on the heavy side. I prefer a more portable version.
GF2 seems like the fit. The size and specs fit between the 2 cameras I have, especially its HD video recording feature. However, after a few days of use, I found that AF feature has more problem during low light indoor environment. It would not auto focus well,it was so blur.
The low light environment wasn't even that dark. There was a case taking video during sunset hour inside the house, with regular 60W light bulb. The focus went outside the center, so the focus went to "outer ring". I tried using photo mode. It is better.
Nonetheless, generally day time photo speed is faster than G12, but not as fast as DSLR yet. However, video recording is better. That's the compromise I can take.
on April 10, 2011
I'm just back from a month travelling with the GF2, my first camera beyond a point-and-shoot or iPhone, and I couldn't be happier with it. I've never liked the idea of lugging some huge DSLR around, and having found this camera, I think I never will.
The body feels really solid and well built (less so the plastic-feeling lens housing), the ergonomics make it great to hold, and the compact body and slim lens are barely noticed on on the neck strap and easily shoved into a bag.
Shots through the 14mm lens look excellent, and it's good to know that there's a growing range of fixed, zoom, telephoto, macro, ultra wide and even 3D lenses for the Micro Four Thirds standard being made by Panasonic, Olympus and others.
The system does a great job of picking values to complement those manually set, and seems to lean towards slightly darker (correctable) photos rather than overexposed (unrecoverable) highlights.
The touch screen is handy, especially for picking a auto-focus region, and the whole menu system is pretty decent, although far short of iPhone standard.
A seriously good camera; functionality a huge step above a digital compact, with portability a huge step above a DSLR, and well priced.
on July 5, 2011
Really enjoy using this lens. Auto iA function works extremely well. Despite owning a high end Canon DSLR, I find I take this camera more often for family trips etc. The selective autofocus is activated just by tapping the screen on what you want the camera to focus on. Definitely works, and is nice to have.
The video function is dead simple with a dedicated video 'shutter' and autofocus works reasonably well. (Very little focus hunting)
The growing arsenal of available Panasonic lenses shows the m4/3 is a viable format and will provide shooters with a full array of tools