I have a GF1 and a GH1, and I just got a E-P2 (see classifieds section for my GF1). I have had about half an hour to play with the E-P2 and here's my first thoughts on it.

- Doesn't feel as comfortable in my hand as the GF1. Looks more "stylish" but I prefer the look and feel of the GF1. The GF1 seems more utilitarian, but rugged. Honestly I think the E-P2 looks tacky compared to it.

- I much prefer the user interface of the GF1/GH1 to the Olympus interface. Seems like the E-P2 is more menu driven, while the Panny's have tied more functionality to quick button presses. The Olympus menus are a bit more "stylized" but I think the Pannys are easier to read and navigate. May be because I'm used to the Panny stuff, so we'll see how I feel after a few weeks with the E-P2.

- I got the E-P2 for two reasons - high resolution EVF and IBIS for using manual telephoto glass and low light. So far I don't see any other advantages of the E-P2 vs. the GF1 as I shoot in RAW and don't mind a bit of post processing.

- Suprised at how much smaller the 17mm is vs. the 20mm. Everything is smaller, it's narrower, even the front and rear caps are a lot smaller.

Can't wait for the GF2, although I'm sure it won't have IBIS. I'm still on the fence as to how much of an advantage this is for me, time will tell. With fast glass in low light, in my experience hand shake is less of an issue than the subject moving. If the GF2 has a built in or optional high res EVF I think that will be my perfectly compromised camera.

Anyways, not trying to start any flame wars, and this is just my very initial opinion, subject to change! Will update this thread as time goes on if anyones interested.

So far I like the GH1 more than either, but I wanted something smaller and more discreet for travel. Aside from that, I much prefer the GH1 to either of the other two, the EVF is better than the E-P2's, and its much more comfortable in hand, especially with large lenses.

I guess theres no such thing as the "perfect" camera :)

Rob

Hi Rob, I would certainly like the regular update, as I am still on the fence. Have used Panasonic in the past, so my initial preference would be for the GF1 (or 2) I guess

__________________
My Photographs on Flickr

Hi Rob,

keep us posted, but most likely I will just have to buy the GF2.
- Me nor my wife (who takes a lot of pictures) are real post-processors, so I hope / assume Panasonic is also going to address the out of the camera JPG performance, actually sounds like firmware update only... Why is / would Panasonic not address this?

If you really go for compactness then which lenses are you considering to add to the package?

• Myself I am thinking about:

• 20 mm F1.7 (no IS),
• 14-140 mm zoom (should start at 12 or lower) and
• 45 mm F2.5 portrait (not fast enough for ultra thin depth of focus),
• 3 good lenses but all just not perfect

__________________
Joep

PS: Try to catch a laugh every day

The 20/1.7 is a nice little lens, but slow to auto-focus and I was suprised at how much smaller the Oly 17/2.8 is (thinner & narrower). You can pick up the Oly 17 cheap (I'm actually selling one :) )

I have a Nokton 35/1.4 which is also very small, obviously manual focus and doesn't focus very tight but I like that for a small carry around lens more. I really like this lens, it's a fun focal length for "everyday" use, is pretty fast, you get a real nice bokeh with it and you don't have to be physically as far away as with a 50-57 more typical "portrait" lens.

The 14-140 is a big pig :) It's heavy and thick and feels awkward on the GF1. That said, it's quick to autofocus and has a very versatile range and I like using it on the GH1 as it balances out much better when you have a real fingerhold. Not a "fast" lens, I think it really shines for video though. I like this lens for outings to the dog beach or park when I have no idea how far away the action will be ;)

You may want to consider the 14-45 and/or the 45-200. The 14-45 is suprisingly small and light; the 45-200 is the same size as the 14-140 but quite a bit lighter and (aperture wise) a bit faster at the same focal lengths I believe. The 14-45 together with the 45-200 weighs a little more than the 14-140 alone.

I don't have the 45/2.8 as it seems a bit slow for me but for 1:1 macro it looks pretty awesome, small, light, IS, autofocus. I have a Hexanon 55/3.5 macro and with the 1:1 tube it's very large. With the 1:1 tube it's f5.6 and probably twice the size of the 45/2.8. Even at 5.6 the DOF is very small doing macro, I would think it'd be hard with f2.8 to focus, but with the AF it's probably a whole different game.

For fast "portrait" I have a couple Hexanons (57/1.2, 57/1.4), the Nokton 35/1.4 and a Nokton 50/1.1. The 1.1 & 1.2 have great depth of field, I love the build and feel of the 50/1.1 but they are both big, heavy lenses. The Nokton 35/1.4 is a really nice little compact, tiny fast lens, overall it might be my favorite lens. It's a hair smaller than the 40/1.4.

Rob

Thanks for posting your thoughts Rob, have you seen/considered installing the reverse engineered GH1 firmware? The enhanced video looks awesome!

Cheers

Brian

__________________
Founder, Olympus Photo Safari Group
http://www.ukphotosafari.org