Will Pentax compete against Micro 4/3's?

[ogl]

I like G1, but
1. I hate EVF
2. camera is not too small and too light.
3. it could be interesting only like G1+20/1.7
4. it can't work with all 4/3 lenses.
5. Europe price - 750 euro.
6. Leica doesn't make lenses for Pany anymore.

[Art Vandelay II]

Originally Posted by JJJPhoto

The first Micro 4/3 camera you see won't be quite as compact and slick as that mock-up either, but still impressive. Keep an eye open at 2:00AM EST tomorrow.

Good call.

It's not quite the camera I'm looking for, but it does look like something that will sell a hell of a lot better than what I want. Unless it's way over priced I don't see how those $300-500 superzoom bridge cameras will survive. I love the articulating LCD on it though. Man I miss that on my old Canon G2.

Interesting that DPReview makes the EVF sound decent:

The pre production units we've played with are not fitted with 'final' versions of the viewfinder, but even so we've been very impressed with what we've seen so far. There's still the slight color 'tearing' if you move your eye too quickly (something common to all field sequential viewfinders we've tried), but the sharpness, resolution, refresh rate, brightness and color are excellent. The real revelation is when you try it next to the Olympus E-420 (using our tried and tested method of putting a camera up to each eye); the G1's viewfinder image looks huge (it's at least 50% larger), and a lot brighter with a standard zoom attached.

Once they perfect this technology I have to think this is the future we're looking at. Now hopefully Olympus will take their E-420 mentality and produce a rangefinder style body for me.

[k100d]

it's hard not to make comments but we should wait until Olympus shows offering. nonetheless for my personal entertainment i will still proceed.

i. how many times can olympus screw over their users? first ditching the OM mount and now it looks like almost all of the 4/3ds lenses won't contrast AF on this body. then again perhaps this isn't so serious because their 4/3ds lenses weren't very small anyways and would be relatively unbalanced.
ii. these lenses and the ones on the roadmap clearly show who this is for, only the 20/1.7 is interesting
iii. dpreview says it looks like an SLR cuz that's how the japanese want it. i thought panasonic had it right with their L1 leica style design
iv. this should be fun mounting lenses from other brands although the 2x crop factor sucks all the fun out of it
v. i want to get a bessa and try out some wide lenses and this hasn't budged me one bit
vi. no video? wth, for the target audience that doesn't make sense. although some are saying there is a possibility of video in the future with AF. but that's not such a huge step up anyways with Contrast AF. again screwing over the early adopters.
vii. incompatibility w/ 4/3ds accesories. again hellooo?!?!

what pisses me off about this is that it shows the 4/3s was quite the scam at the very least from the panasonic side. i really hope olympus will release a better m4/3s body and show some lenses because this is underwhelming. olympus better be careful here because as the camera gets more electronic, a bigger hand from panasonic will want in this "joint venture"

however the fast af and brilliant vf have me interested

[ghelary]

Panasonic is a very highly regarded brand in France for P&S and compete in volume with Canon.

Panasonic Lumix LX2 was in its time considered as the best P&S expert available, and LX3 seems to follow the same path. Owning an LX2 myself, I can tell that it is indeed an excellent camera.

First report about this G1 seems to be excellent, even if a first implementation can't get all the juice of a new format.

I would buy such a system as the "camera in my bag" as is my Lumix now. Just wait to see more mature and compact systems. I won't abandon K-mount, I think, it just deserve a different purpose.

Guillaume

[Art Vandelay II]

The Imaging Resource has a slightly better preview up:
Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 Digital Camera - Hands-On Preview - The Imaging Resource!

They actually talk about how well the camera works a s camera instead of just running through the specs.

Here's a nice blurb about a possible pocket size MFT's:

So, while the Panasonic G1 is definitely smaller than the smallest SLR on the market, it's not (yet) pocket-sized. On that topic, a senior Panasonic product planner who briefed us on the camera said that they actually could make even smaller bodies using the Micro Four Thirds standard, but they were concerned that US users in particular would find them too small. I suspect that's the case in general, but I'd bet that a really small "rangefinder-style" Micro Four Thirds camera would find a lot of takers among people looking for a very small camera for street photography and other traditional rangefinder uses.

Sounds like it was just simply a choice not to make a small one. Hopefully they'll give us one in the future. Of course I simply just don't think they want to cannibalize sales of their LX3.

[thibs]

Originally Posted by Art Vandelay II

Sounds like it was just simply a choice not to make a small one. Hopefully they'll give us one in the future. Of course I simply just don't think they want to cannibalize sales of their LX3.

Alright but what's the point behind micro4/3 then, I wonder?

[thibs]

Originally Posted by RMabo

Now the question is, who will make lenses for micro 4/3?
Oly and Pana surely yes (Leica micro 4/3 will surely come) but who else - Sigma?

The rumour is Leica getting out of 4/3

[Clicker]

Because of how well the Panasonic TZ5 P&S i have works, i was going to replace my Canon S3IS with the Panasonic FZ28 (new bridge toy) this G1 had me reconsidering but as i only "want" a replacement bridge, the FZ28 won because the K200D with certain lenses + the bridge and dedicated P&S TZ5 to me is a better travel system not taking weight into the equation. Why would i need TWO dSLR systems for traveling, i'd rather get a backup body.

If i didn't have anything, i would consider it. So the short answer for me is "yes" Pentax is competing but not in that format.

[Art Vandelay II]

Originally Posted by thibs

Alright but what's the point behind micro4/3 then, I wonder?

• It's still the smallest interchangeable camera on the market even if it's not as small as I want.
• With it's live view system it is the perfect camera to entice P&S users that want better quality.
• Could be the perfect camera for hikers/outdoors types that don't want a ton of weight.
• Superzooms sell really well, but their IQ sucks, MFT's will offer much better IQ in a slightly larger package.
• No more mirror slap. A wedding photographers dream.
• When they do make a slimmer body street shooters will finally have their ideal camera.

I can think of more, but I am tired of typing

Keep in mind, 95% of photographers use P&S's, not DSLR's. So as much as we think the world revolves around DSLR's the overwhelming majority doesn't give two shits about them.

[Art Vandelay II]

Originally Posted by thibs

The rumour is Leica getting out of 4/3

I don't think they need Leica if Oly makes lenses for MFT's as well as they have for 4/3's. Their 4/3's lens line up is so nice I once pondered leaving Pentax for them but I decided against it because their view finders were crap (with the exception of the E3).

[falconeye]

I thought I provide a comparison for convenient reference.

New Panasonic G1:
camera body incl. batteries:
124 mm x 84 mm x 45 mm, ~440 g, ~0.47 liters

Pentax *istDS:
camera body incl. batteries:
125 x 93 x 66 mm, 605 g, ~0.77 liters

So, setting Pentax *istDS at 100%, we get for the G1:

Volume: 61%
Dimensions: 99 x 90 x 68 % (85% avg.)
Weight: 73%

Overall: 72%

Not that much smaller.

[ogl]

Originally Posted by thibs

The rumour is Leica getting out of 4/3

DigitalCamera.jp

there is no Leica brand marks on lenses...
only LUMIX.

adaptor for several 4/3 lenses is not small.
http://www.digitalcamera.jp/html/Hot...2/G1-075-L.jpg

I don't see BIG difference in dimensions with smallest DSLR.

[cyg]

Originally Posted by falconeye

Not that much smaller.

I think 60% of the volume and 70-something% of the weight is a *huge* difference. The difference between the *ist DS (which I own) and Oly's E-420 is already very noticeable in practice, and we're talking of a much larger difference in size (if not in volume).

What is most surprising is that the G1 lenses are not much smaller than similar Pentax or Oly kit lenses. The tele is even quite a bit larger (although it also reaches longer).

Wonder if it's due to the stabilizer, because on effect of the shorter registration distance was supposed to be much smaller lenses.

[ogl]

Originally Posted by cyg

I think 60% of the volume and 70-something% of the weight is a *huge* difference. The difference between the *ist DS (which I own) and Oly's E-420 is already very noticeable in practice, and we're talking of a much larger difference in size (if not in volume).

What is most surprising is that the G1 lenses are not much smaller than similar Pentax or Oly kit lenses. The tele is even quite a bit larger (although it also reaches longer).

Wonder if it's due to the stabilizer, because on effect of the shorter registration distance was supposed to be much smaller lenses.

Pentax won't make such small cameras. E-420 has no SR. Remember it!

[Seraf]

Why no SR? you have SR i optio series so why not in such a body? ok it'll be probably less efective but still a unique feature