Discussion in 'Computing, Science, and Technology' started by Meikura, Sep 23, 2009.
I'm considering buying one, anyone have one/know anyone that has one?
I'm on the same boat as you, I'm looking to get a DSLR soon, and the G1 came into mind. I'm mainly worried about lens incompatibilities, but on the other hand, it's nice and compact. I'll scope about the market some more.
Me too, but there are adaptors you can buy for certain types of lenses. If you do get a G1, a little tidbit I discovered is that the optical image stabiliser is in the lens, not the camera itself. So if you use a lens that doesn't have a stabiliser, you're going to have yourself some wobbly shots Please Register or Log in to view images
I'm also worried that I'm paying for the "label", if you get me. I don't know if it's just me, but some aspects of the camera don't sound that impressive. I'm just not sure if it's worth the 68,000円 price tag, and was hoping someone on the forum could chip in!
Please Register or Log in to view images
Never knew that, about the stabiliser. That's tipping the scales even more in favour of Nikon. I think the main selling point is the size, which they see as a right to charge needless €/£/円 for it.
I'm eyeing up the D3000, it seems good enough for me, with a reasonable price.
Actually, I'm super excited! I've just realised the camera in the shop is the GH1, not the G1. I'm not even sure if the GH1 is available anywhere outside of Japan yet, but it should cost 120,000円, and I'm buying mine for 68,000円 (brand new).
I absolutely cannot wait till tomorrow! Please Register or Log in to view images
Orly? What's the GH1 got that the G1 doesn't?
Micro Four Thirds? I would personally avoid it in favor of a camera with a larger sensor, especially if you're going to buy a DSLR. Micro four thirds means a smaller viewfinder and bunches of extra noise.
And image stabilization? For the most part, a good lens will counter any need for it. It's really only useful in low light situations without a flash with a stationary subject and in long telephoto lenses, it's pretty unnecessary in a normal lens.
Oh yeah, I bought that bad boy. Turns out I was wrong, but I still went ahead and bought myself a G1 anyway.
Actually, the view finder is amazing. It's really high detail, and the trade off of having a digital viewfinder is well worth it. Optical may be better in terms of quality in low light situations, but being able to magnify a portion of the picture so your manual focus is perfectly on target is amazing. Once again, the noise only counts in low light situations, I've never had a problem with it.
And image stabilization? For the most part, a good lens will counter any need for it. It's really only useful in low light situations without a flash with a stationary subject and in long telephoto lenses, it's pretty unnecessary in a normal lens.[/QUOTE]
Because a good lens would have optical image stabilisation. Without it, pictures are blurred from even simple hand shaking no matter what light you're in.
The camera itself is really good! Over all I'm very happy with it and I'd highly recommend it to anyone else looking to get a DSLR. It's packed with all the features you'd expect (except recording video), and it's very light and portable. Not small enough to put in your pocket, but it certainly won't weigh you down.
I didn't realize that Micro 4/3rds had a digital viewfinder. I think that means that (by definition) it isn't a DSLR.
And blurry pictures without image stabilization? I'm not trying to insult or start a flame war with a mod, but that's simply not true, at all. None of my lenses have image stabilization and I can produce sharp images without any trouble. Sometimes things get a little tricky at night, but generally I'm taking pictures of people, so image stabilization won't help me there. You just have to buy good lenses. I choose to shoot without any zoom lenses, I just have 28mm, 50mm, and 80mm primes, and the wider apertures I get by using primes negates the need for image stabilization.
It's kind of a grey zone. It has the same sensor as a DSLR, and has interchangeable lenses, but since it's missing the mirror and prism system to allow an optical viewfinder I don't think it fully classes as a DSLR. To be fair though, calling it anything less than a DSLR is insulting to the camera Please Register or Log in to view images
I've no idea what camera you have, but isn't it possible that it has an image stabiliser built into the camera itself? I know for a fact that the G1 doesn't, and if you're taking pictures on the move then it's best to fix yourself a lens with an image stabiliser. Personally, I wouldn't shoot without it.
Separate names with a comma.