Quote:
Originally Posted by FlamingStuffedTiger
The GF-1 is definitely a good option for a portable pseudo-DSLR, but it has some downsides you should be aware of: Firstly, the 20mm "Pancake" lens is indeed a good and fast lens, but it has no zoom. You will probably want to add a lens with decent zoom at a later time. However, since the GF-1 lacks built-in IS, your lens selection is severely constrained imo. You would probably have to buy a Panasonic lens (because they have electronic stabilization built into the lens) or compensate by buying faster and more expensive lens if you want to go with a different brand.
The only other camera I can think of that could compete with the Panasonic GF-1 (aside from the E-P1) right now is the Olympus E-PL1. However, it is really tough to say which one is better overall because they seem to fit different needs. On the one hand, the E-PL1 is not as constrained when it comes to lens selection because it has IS in the body. Thus, it should be much cheaper to go the Olympus route since you can pick from a wide variety of cost effective lenses. However, auto-focus (AF) feels MUCH slower on the Olympus micro 4/3s line, at least much slower than a DSLR should be. That said, the picture quality of both cameras are fairly close from what I have read.
In the end it seems to be a matter of what you can live with: If you can live with the slower AF, Olympus looks to be the better pick mainly due to lower cost. But I know some people that would pay the extra for the GF-1's speed without a second thought.
|
Thanks. I've only looked into the E-P1, not the E-PL1. I've also read that the Olympus has slower AF, but the picture quality is pretty much the same.
Quote:
Originally Posted by I-Hate-Hulse
That GF-1 and all looks great, and I'd consider one over a SLR, but at the end of the day you'll still have to lug around a least a couple of lenses (20mm + zoom). If you go for a multi length zoom you'll lose a lot of the "compactness" that's one if it's main features.
I've always believed that the best camera to have is the one that's actually in your hand when the shot presents itself, so I value portability a lot on my trips. I'm not quite sure where you are going but if you're going to areas with inhospitable environments, you'll also only be as good as the camera case you have.
So what's worked for me in this dual priority situation? For me, it's been the Canon G7.
- Good quality images.
- Full Manual Controls
- compact
- decent wide / zoom lengths
- Fits into an inexpensive $25 hard lexan Pelican case (clear lid) that's 100% water / sand proof).
- relatively inexpensive at $~500
Maybe it's the way I travel but I could never fathom having a giant camera bag of valuable stuff through the generally less developed places I go to (I backpack). This solution works great for me.
Have a look at the Canon G11 and see if it strikes your fancy. It does lack HD video but I would expect the G12 due this year will have it. |
Our plans are Hawaii, Australia and New York, so we're not going anywhere remote.
I will take a look at the G7 and G11. I've always been particular toward Canon cameras, but the XSi/T1i/T2i seem too big for me. I never thought about the G line.
Thanks.