1. Welcome to Mu-43.com—a friendly Micro 4/3 camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

A simplified GF-1 vs. E-PL1 review...

Discussion in 'This or That? (MFT only)' started by tpitch14, Apr 8, 2010.

  1. tpitch14

    tpitch14 Mu-43 Regular

    Mar 31, 2010
    ...can be found on David Chua's site, here:

    David Chua's GF1 vs. EPL1

    Just thought some others out there who are looking for a comparison of the two might be able to find this useful, as it shows both at their most 'basic' forms...

    EDIT: this has certainly helped me in my quest for information, but yet, every time that I arrive at the E-PL1 there's a little voice in the back of my head that says "Wait! the GF-1 has faster AF... etc. etc."
  2. Iansky

    Iansky Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Dec 26, 2009
    The Cotswolds, UK
    Sorry but personally I find this comparison redundant due to the price difference as well as the capability difference of the two cameras.
    The GF1 is in direct competition to the EP1/2 range whereas the EPL1 is a cheaper camera aimed at users who prefer an auto everything rather than more manual use.
    The EPL1 is a cheap clone of the GF1 as the body size and shape is closer to the GF1 than EP series - it has a built in flash yet lower shutter speed range than the EP1/2 series as they do not want it to compete directly.
    The JPEG's from the EPL1 are supposedly far better than those from the EP1/2 range as indicated in Steve Huff's review, however, it is only akin to the GF1 by way of shape, size and built in flash - not overall technical offerings.
  3. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator

    Apr 10, 2009
    Boston, MA (USA)
    The E-PL1 has all the usual manual settings. It just uses buttons rather than dials. The only real capability lacking on the E-PL1 is the ability to go shorter than 1/2000s.
    • Like Like x 1
  4. Brian Mosley

    Brian Mosley Administrator Emeritus

    Dec 15, 2009
    Actually, the 1/2000s limitation is less of a limitation than I expected Amin... I'm more irked by the lack of electronic levels.

    I'm not convinced that the jpegs are 'far better' than those of the E-P1/2... although the colour signature has been improved at high ISO and noise reduction / sharpening improved slightly.

    The body shape is easier to hold (grip is more substantial) and the camera is noticeably lighter - but feels very strong to me... no creaks with a 1.4Kg ZD lens attached. It may be cheaper and lighter, but I don't think it's any poorer in build quality.


  5. dcisive

    dcisive Mu-43 Veteran

    Feb 19, 2010
    Salt Lake City, Utah
    I'm with Brian on this one. I had a P1 and while I agree it feels like a small brick in one's hand, the PL1 isn't really less well built, as it is still solid, and mostly metal except for the back plate which has no flex either. I also agree with the tweaking of the firmware they likely did along with the weaker AA filter, which is a help. All in all it's a great package, which for my purposes focuses just fine for what I shoot.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.