Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Panasonic Cameras' started by Pelao, Jul 11, 2011.
Panasonic DMC G3 Review: 1. Introduction: Digital Photography Review
They've set the record for the number of times, within the same review, that they contrive to mention the 'missing' eye sensor for switching between lcd and evf. In the DPR world it's obviously a big thing.......
I am seriously considering picking up a G3, so I'm not Olympus fanboy.
In the review there are 3 pages that compare the same image taken different cameras. You can select any camera that's been reviewed by DPR. You can also move the magnify area to any point in the picture.
Can someone else compare the G3 to the E-PL2 or E-PL3? Move the magnify area to the "Q" on the Queen of Hearts playing card in the scene. I looked at several areas, but this one was particularly interesting. Also magnify the color card in the high ISO comparison.
I honestly think the Olympus looks better.
A couple of things:
1. Move around different areas of the image. To my eye, at the same ISO, there are times when the G3 is better, and time when another camera is better. There are so many patterns and colours etc, that you have to compare a number of areas to gain a useful reading: and then judge against what is crucial to me. The G3 seems very impressive at high ISO, but I am more interested in low ISO detail and shadow, so that's what I look at most.
2. Are you looking at jpeg or RAW? The jpeg engines in particular have different points of strength and weakness between brands over the exposure and ISO range. I only look at the jpegs out of curiosity: I only shoot RAW so that's what I look at. The G3 RAW files are very, very good in my view - at least for my needs. Within the ISO range I shoot at, the G3 handles itself very well against more traditional DSLRS.
I looked at all 3. I shoot RAW, too. So that's what I'm most interested in. The high ISO stuff doesn't thrill me all that much.
I was expecting the G3 to blow away the E-PL2. Some of what I saw might be personal preference or adjusted in post processing. I'm looking for which one has the best tonal range. I've seen a lot of numbers and such, but I don't see a lot of difference in the final product.
I'm still considering a G3 to compliment the E-P3 I have on order. maybe I'll find the sweet spot for each camera. I don't see how either one is measurably superior to the other at this point.
out of curiosity, what made you feel that would happen?
For some reason there seems to be a color softness with the images compared to the other cameras. Hard to put my finger on it.
The Ep3 has no RAW, but, I don't see that big a difference from the EPL2 RAW. It is a matter of what you want... in body styles. These is a difference, and once you edit them, it will get less. I am getting the G3, I already have a G1, the EP3 was compelling, but at $800.00, it was way out of my budget. I do like the tougher body though... oh well....
Mostly all the fanboy talk on another forum. ;-)
Seriously, 16MP vs 12MP, the newer in-house sensor (I was mostly looking at the G3 compared to the E-PL2), the Leica DNA in the lenses, and just a feeling that the Lumix line has it a little bit more together than Olympus at the moment.
I kind of stumbled into the M4/3 world. I won an E-PL1 kit (2 actually) in a Popular Photography/America Photo "Travelographer of the Year" contest last year.
I was really impressed with the images from the camera. I travel a lot in my work and it's great not hauling the Canon 5DII gear around the world for the few hours I get to myself to go photograph something.
Of course, I started collecting lenses and such. Now I hordly ever pick up the 5DII and when I do it feels like an anvil around my neck.
I know there's a big gap between m4/3 and the FF Canon, but the perceptible difference in the final output is getting less and less.
So, now I'm on a quest to get pro level quality out of my smaller gear.
ah. I think it may have been oversold then. I was just happy to see a good push in the right direction by panasonic. I wasn't expecting to be amazed, but we needed something better than the old 12MP sensor. trying to consolidate gear myself.. I rarely touch my 5D anymore. I think m43 can suffice my needs for events when I do them, so I'm hoping to make the push for it =)
Also, you won two m43 cameras? you lucky bum, haha. All this talk about the G3 and I am just waiting for panasonic to ship me the g3 I ordered...
I was expecting something similar, mostly due to the new sensor. It's just not that different, however.
lol... Whatever did they do back in the day of DSLRs, when they had to actually press a button to tell the camera to use Live View?
Seriously though, the auto switch was very cool.
I don't see any problem with LCD/EVF switch. I do see about 1 stop high ISO improvement in G3's raw vs E-PL2 from DPR review. There may be less difference in jpeg and the review emphasizes that at ISO1600 and up, G3's RAW is much better than jpeg. I think what's really imprtant is that DPR reports significantly less shadow noise at base ISO compared to previous models. I wonder why they are comparing G3 to D3100 and not e.g. Canon T3i or even T2i? Realistically, I think m43 will probably be always lagging about 1 stop at high ISO and 1 stop in DR compared to entry-level DSLRs which, I think, is fantastic!! and very easy treadeoff for a much more portable size, lighter lenses, AF video and live view. How is that touch to focus working on DSLR? Didn't think so. Good ISO3200 is already within reach. Panasonic needs to do a much better job with zoom lens size reduction. I know they have OIS but so are APS-C size lenses and they're similar in size and weight. I expect Pana 14-140mm to be no more than 350g (vs Oly 290g w/no OIS) instead we got a monster swell of a lens far exceeeing the weight of any m43 body to date. Great job on pancakes though!
All review sites have their own particular angles, biases and commercial interests. I find Dpreview a bit more suspect than many in some ways. Their categories are arbitrary and this is causing them some issues. They also get very hung up on specific points that may or may not be important to particular users.
To your specific point, I think it is deliberate to compare the G3 to the D3100: it's close in price point sure, but we wouldn't want M4/3 to get above it's station would we? In the report they admit the G3 is pretty much equal to the G3 for stills, yet compare to a low-end Nikon.
Contrast this with Cameralabs, where the comparison is with the T3i / D5100, and the review celebrates similar or superior performance on the part of the G3 for a lower price. This is the great news of the G3 and the latest smaller Pens: ever improving power and good pricing.