Once upon a time, in a land far away, there were two main types of cameras. There was the DSLR, a camera where you looked through a viewfinder and saw through the lens. This required a flapping mirror device which had many shortcomings; but was the only way you could effectively work with different lenses on the same body. And then there was the point and shoot camera for those who just wanted to take snaps and had no interest in fiddling about with lenses.
And Panasonic and Olympus saw this situation, and verily they saw that it was nonsense. Surely there was a market for an interchangeable lens system without the size, weight and complexity of a DSLR? And there was, and they called it Micro Four Thirds (MFT) and it was announced in August 2008.
Cameras don’t have to be big to be good.
Yours truly was somewhat weary of lugging fifteen kilos of camera gear on trips that might involved the use of a camera, so I climbed aboard the MFT train with a Panasonic GF1. What a revelation. The images could be as good as my DSLR, and the photography was so much more fun without all the baggage. She who must be obeyed caught the bug and chose an Olympus EP-1, because it was pretty.
Thousands of photos, and a few extra lenses, and we still love our little cameras. But times move on and I felt the need for an upgrade. Other companies had seen the sales growth and potential of what are now known generically as Compact System Cameras. Moving away from MFT would involve selling off our lens collection, but what were the options?
Pentax- The smallest of the systems, tiny body and lenses, crap interface and rubbish pictures. No thank you. Canon - Still sitting on the sidelines scratching their bum, Canon have yet to dip their toe in this pool. The prospect of having to develop a new line of lenses and potentially impact their DSLR sales is maybe why they are yet to commit. Nikon - Waited a long time too, but finally announced their 1 series. Some very clever technology with great focusing and speed, but a tiny sensor in a body that looks like a Lego brick. To quote DigitalRev: “mainly rubbish”. Sony - Along with Canon and Nikon, the big player in the camera business and their NEX-7 seems like it is quite a body; although focusing is a little suspect and there are far too many pixels stuffed on the sensor. But lens choice? Nah. Plus, it’s made by Sony.
So that leave MFT, which now has a huge selection of lenses and at least seven bodies available from Panasonic and Olympus. Plus, as I have professed in the past, I love my GF1 and the GX1 is just a GF1 with more goodies, so the choice was easy.
The GX1 is a little bit smaller than the GF1:
As I think the GF1 is a perfect size, making it smaller is not a good idea. The right side of the camera (looking from the back) is noticeably closer to the lens mount; which means Panasonic have had to include a bulky grip so your hand has something to curl round. Overall, I think the GF1 sits better in my hands; but your hands might give a different reaction.
The top of the camera has chunky on/off switch and an equally chunky dial. There is a shutter button, a video record button (1080i if you are interested), a stereo microphone for the video, and an “intelligent auto” knob. Press this and it glows blue to let you know that the camera has taken over full control and decided how it will take the shot. This feature was on the mode dial on the GF1 and I never used it; doubt I will use it now that it is a button.
Heading round the back and we encounter a disappointment, the same resolution screen as the GF1, and it is not articulated.
But once you get over that disappointment, it’s all good. First of all, there are plenty of buttons to play with. Metal buttons too, which work with a satisfying click. There is one more physical button than the GF1; but now there is also a very useable and extremely customisable quick menu which pops out on the screen at the press of one of the buttons (the button marked QMenu, you will not be surprised to know).
You set up the items and display order for the quick menu, and you can then select choices by using the D-pad or just by touching the screen. Yes, the screen may not be higher resolution; but at least you can interact directly with it.
Two of the buttons on the back are programmable (Fn1 and the AF/AE lock button) and if you select a pop-out menu on the touch screen, there are two more.
(Note the green bar, that’s telling me that I have the camera level; another useful little addition for someone who is always having to straighten up photos).
At the top of the pop-out menu there is another icon which allows you to select what happens when you touch the screen in shooting mode. By default, touching the screen allows you to move the focus point around the screen. This is immensely useful and so much quicker than using the D-pad. Choose where to focus, anywhere on the screen, with a touch of your finger; let’s see you do that on a DSLR.
Changing the option on the pop-out menu takes things a step further. Touch the screen and the camera focuses on that point and takes a photo; and it does it really quickly. Great for candid shots.
Talking of speed, the GX1 really shines here. The GF1 was no slouch, but the GX1 is a GF1 in turbo mode. There is nothing that is going to slow you down when taking photos with this little beast. Turn it on and it is ready for shooting almost instantaneously, use the buttons and quick menu to change options, select the focus point with your finger and fire away. Focusing is lightning fast, particularly with more recent lenses such as the Olympus 45mm.
Talking of focusing, the GX1 adds an extra option to the focusing choices. There is single shot focus where you focus on something and take the shot. There is manual focusing which is as elegantly supported as ever, and there is continuous focus which tracks objects as they move. The new option if flexible focus which is intended for subjects that are moving slightly. Not sure how this differs from continuous focus in operation, time will tell.
Like the GF1, the GX1 has a pop-up flash. Unlike the GF1, the flash can be moved around so you can use bounce flash as well as direct.
This was taken on the street, so I couldn’t bounce the flash off a ceiling, hence the reflection off the nose. Just like the GF1, the GX1 is great at pumping out just the right amount of flash for a correct exposure.
Many people use the screens on the back of these cameras for composing their shots. I have two problems with this. Firstly, shooting in the bright sunlight of Thailand can make it impossible to see the screen. Secondly, I can get less shaky shots if I can jam my camera against my face and stare through a viewfinder. The viewfinder for the GF1 was better than nothing, but that’s about all you can say about it. The GX1 viewfinder is bigger, brighter and with more resolution, a pleasure to stare through. It also has the diopter adjustment hidden away so you can’t keep changing it by mistake, and the LCD/viewfinder swap button is better placed on the back of the unit. But it does add significantly to the cost and it sticks out the top of the camera in a less than charming manner; so you may not feel the need.
More metal than plastic, the GX1 has a sturdy, quality look and feel.The controls are extensive and customisable, the touch screen is more than a gimmick and the whole is a competent camera which retains the spirit of fun of the GF1 and adding more speed and ease of use. So far so good.
But how are the images?
The GF1 takes great photos. Should anyone start going on about how MFT cameras can’t compete with big DSLRs in the quality department, I tell them of the man I know who sold a GF1 image through Getty Images, one of the more demanding of stock libraries, for $11,000. If it’s good enough for Getty, it’s good enough for me.
But it’s true that the smaller sensor size of MFT leads to more noise at higher ISOs, and the GX1 should hopefully improve that. But it has to struggle with a more pixels crammed on the sensor (16 megapixels compared to the 12 megapixels of the GF1), and the base ISO is 160, compared to the 100 of the GF1.
This was my test subject (the line down the back is the edge of a wall):
All the images were shot in RAW. If you shoot JPEG then the camera will attempt to deal with any noise; but I prefer to deal with it myself.
Here’s a comparison at base ISO for each camera, pretty similar result:
Jumping to ISO 800, the GX1 is holding up much better than the GF1.
At ISO 800 I can dial in some noise reduction in Lightroom with the GX1 and still have a useable image, whilst the GF1 is getting a little mushy.
Once we hit ISO 1600, the GF1 is moving into snowstorm mode and trying to remove all that noise would lose you a load of detail.
But the GX1 is still recoverable at ISO 1600 and with a bit of adjustment you can get a perfectly acceptable image:
The GF1 goes to ISO 3200, by which time it is a mess. The GX1 goes to ISO 12,800 and is also a mess by this point; but you can recover something a little blotchy but just about useable:
So, the GX1 gives you more pixels to play with, and provides improved high ISO performance in spite of that. ISO 1600 should be comfortable and higher would be manageable, a decent improvement over the GF1.
But what does all this mean in practice?
Here’s a test for any camera: Take it down Walking Street and capture some street life. You need a small camera like the GX1, because if you point a big Canon at some of the characters down there, you are likely to end up with a broken camera and a broken head. You need something that can successfully track focus in very dark conditions; and those same conditions will need a lens with plenty of light and the use of high ISOs, because you can’t use flash unless you want the same broken camera/head scenario.
So I took the GX1 onto Walking Street last night. I have already posted a couple of shots and will post some more in a separate post; but here is an example I like:
Panasonic GX1 with Olympus 45mm lens at F1.8, ISO 6400.
I used the touch screen to quickly move the focus point to the left had side of the screen. Using continuous focus, the GX1 tracked the girls as they walked down the street. Even with the tiny depth of field that comes with F1.8, the focus was spot on, and I could take the shot with no delay when the girl on the left turned her head. An ISO of 6400 could be cleaned up (I made it black and white because there was an orange glow coming from a Go-Go which didn’t do the colour version any favours). Et voilà, a passable street shot in the most difficult of conditions, with a camera you can (almost) put in your pocket.
I love the GF1 because it is fast and fun. I love the GX1 because it is even faster and even more fun. There is nothing that gets in the way of taking photos and I am itching to go out and have an extended shoot with it somewhere. I haven’t talked about video or the various JPEG and creative photo options, because I don’t use them. I haven’t talked about many of the other neat new features, because I think I have already written too much. Suffice it to say I think the GX1 is the best compact system camera on the market right now.
So, should you get one? Possibly not.
If you are not into processing RAW files, have a look at the Olympus offerings which produce beautiful JPEGs, although watch out for fairly pathetic high ISO performance. Alternatively, the Panasonic G3 is almost on par with the GX1 and has an articulated screen and a built in viewfinder for a lot less money; but with far fewer controls and a plastic body. Or spend more money and look at the Panasonic GH2. Or wait until February 8th and check out the new Olympus OM-D; and the Panasonic GH3 can’t be far behind. The agony of choice; just don’t buy anything that uses a mirror, that is so yesterday.
Thanks for reading, and here is some camera porn to finish off with:
GX1 and Voigtlander 25mm F0.95, the ultimate MFT combo?
GX1 with the impossibly cute Schneider-Kreuznach Xenoplan 25mm F1.9
GX1 with the impossibly cheap Navatar 75mm F1.3
Comments 🔗
2012-01-17| Pharmk600 saysHello! edacage interesting edacage site! I’m really like it! Very, very edacage good!
2012-01-17| Dave saysHow does it compare to your Fuji X100 , IQ , low light performance, ISO and AF?
2012-01-18| Spike saysX100 has a better viewfinder and more immediately gorgeous images, but the GX1 destroys it in terms of useability. That’s the summary, I feel a blog post may be required for a fuller comparison. Next week.
2012-01-20| Ad saysVery useful review. Thanks. I might have to get one now.
2012-01-21| PSA_Batman saysAt fortune the price for a GX1 is 25k baht. Is that reasonable? I have no idea of what a reasonable local price is.
2012-01-21| PsA_Batman saysI see that AV Camera have it for 20,990 here http://www.avcamera.com/. Not sure if that includes VAT though. Might just give them a call.
2012-01-21| Spike saysThe AV Camera price is body only. Big Camera do it with two lenses for 28k. 25k with one lens would be about right.
2012-01-29| Peter Thomson saysGreat review, loved the size comparison with the Canon SLR. It’s good to see another reviewer testing the GX1 as a street photographer. I think the GX1 would make an ideal street photography camera. When I got to test it out I found that it was fast and flexible: http://www.londonstreetphoto.org/panasonic-gx1-launch/ I’m glad you found the same.
2012-01-29| Spike saysThanks Peter; have been enjoying your site for some time. Come to Pattaya, there are things on the street here that you will never find in London!
2012-02-11| NiKo saysIn all your sample images, the GF1 clearly outperforms the GX1 in terms of sharpness IMHO. That’s pretty weird, I guess this relates to NR level, JPEG smoothing or something.
2012-02-12| Spike saysThey were all shot in RAW. Suspect any differences you see are caused by the different amount of cropping due to the different sized sensors?
2012-02-15| Emus saysThe GX1 ISO 800 and 1600 images seem to be be out of focus (soft). The ISO 160 image is better. Did something happen to the focus during the test?
2012-02-16| Spike saysYes.
2012-02-16| David saysDpreview gives the camera 77%, silver award. They say the JPEGS are good. Since I only shoot JPEG (x100) I might be interested in buying the GX1 too. What is your opinion abiut the JPEGS?
2012-02-17| Spike saysSorry David, I only shoot RAW.
2012-02-17| David saysOk. Should I buy the GX1 with 2 lenses. Which one would that be?
- The 25mm f1.4?
- The 20mm f1.7?
- The 14-42mm X?
- The 45mm f1.8?
Which ones do you advice?
2012-02-18| Spike saysDefinitely get the 45mm F1.8, it’s a great lens. Then either the 20mm or the 25mm. The latter has rave reviews, the former is cheaper but slower to focus. The 14-42 is getting very mixed reviews.
My personal holy trinity of primes would be the Olympus 12mm, the Panasonic/Leica 25mm and the Olympus 45mm. Right now I only have the 45mm.
2012-02-18| Grant saysSell more horse pictures…
2012-02-18| Spike saysIt’s why I shoot horses….
2012-02-18| Grant saysWhen will you be finished…?
2012-02-18| David saysHorses for courses!
2012-02-18| David saysI have an X100, which I love and is perfect for nice sharp photos. I want the GX1 for flexibility and fast autofocus for situations where the X100 don’t work.
So the 45mm for nice bokeh/portraits/walkng street safe distant street phtotography definitely.
I probably should start with that one. How are the reviews of the old non collapsable 14-42 lens?
2012-02-18| Spike saysI have the 14-45mm which came with the GF1 and it is a very good lens. Not sure about the 14-42mm.
2012-02-18| Spike saysHorses for lenses!
2012-02-18| Spike saysWhen they don’t want me or I get sick of it. But don’t worry, I have about 35,000 polo photos so we can have a weekly (or even daily) “polo horse photo just for Grant” feature.
2012-02-18| Grant saysOh No!! At one a day that would last for 95 years…
2012-04-05| Jamie in Phuket saysLooks like the GF5 is out now too… http://www.dpreview.com/products/panasonic/slrs/panasonic_dmcgf5
2012-04-05| Spike saysSeems like a slightly upgraded GF3 for quite a lot more money. Waiting for Pansasonic’s answer to the EM-5.
2012-04-05| Grant saysOh No!! At one a day that would last for 95 years….