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

tpitch14

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
165
Location
PA
...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."
 

Iansky

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Dec 26, 2009
Messages
2,002
Location
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.
 

Amin Sabet

Administrator
Joined
Apr 10, 2009
Messages
10,879
Location
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.
 

Brian Mosley

Administrator Emeritus
Joined
Dec 15, 2009
Messages
2,998
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.

Cheers

Brian
 

dcisive

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Feb 19, 2010
Messages
460
Location
Salt Lake City, Utah
Real Name
Lee
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.
 
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2009-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom