I'm sure there must be folks who have made this move. They loved their GX1 but updated to one of these newer models. You've got money invested in 4/3 lenses so it made sense. And the newer features made the decision easier. Having made the switch, would you do it again based solely on image quality improvements? Is it a "Wow!" Or an "Ehhh....it's a bit better." I'm sure there are lots of pixel peepers who can state unequivocally that it's a no-brainer. I'll have to confess that I peep a bit myself and in general am a bit of a sharpness nut ... I just can't help myself. But if you step back and take a broad view of overall image quality...what do you think? Sitting now with the 20mm/1.7, 14mm/2.5, 45-150/4-5.6 and the older kit 14-42. Always felt the best I've seen out of that 20/1.7 was shooting on E-PL1...should have kept that thing...and 14/2.5 on E-PM1 is a tidy package for walking around. Any comments appreciated. Thanks. Sent from my iPad using Mu-43
I jumped from Gen 1 (E-P1) to Gen-ish 3 (G3 / EPM1) - the biggest two thing I noticed was the AF speed improvement (E-PM1) and ability to crop 'more' (G3). I actually still like the images my E-P1 turns out. Personally, I'd follow a similar pattern today - skip a generation or two as the incremental improvements don't do much for me; in the meantime invest in good glass.
Dynamic range will be the biggest and most obvious difference between the GX1 and the latest generation of sensors, although not so much if you shoot in the higher contrast and more saturated jpeg modes. In my brief experience with the GX1 I found it to be plenty sharp with the right lens and don't think that you will see much difference in resolution at low ISOs.
My move from E-P1 and E-PM1 to GX7 was pretty significant, life became an awful lot better after, buy only in terms of the range of light I could shoot in and speed. A keeper from the E-P1 looks as good (maybe better!!) as a keeper from the GX7, just it's easier to shoot a keeper with the GX7 Sent from my iPhone using Mu-43
High-ish (1600-3200) ISO are much better on the gx7. SS will allow you to use the 20 one stop faster (if that means anything) and the raws at lower isos are more malleable. That's it pretty much imho-speaking of iq alone. I do however think that the 7 is much more useable in many respects than the 1. Focus peaking for macro, wysiwyg in m mode, evf, tilting screen...
I upgraded from a GX1 to E-P5 and I much prefer the images from the Pen. They seem sharper, have more punch, and better colors. I much enjoy the dual control dials on the E-P5 to the fiddly and tiny single control wheel of the GX1. The E-P5 feels better to my hands and has a far better EVF, it's actually the best viewer I've ever used beyond a 35mm rangefinder or large format camera. I ended up selling the GX1 just to get rid of it cause I knew I'd never use it again. I've never used the GX7 so I can't comment on that other than I know it has the advantage of better high ISO handling, built in EVF, peaking, and superior video. The E-P5 also has way better Auto WB control and handles low ISO better than the GX1 as well. The only downside is that the Pen made me buy more M43 lenses...
Thanks for the comments. I'm inclined to wait another year for prices to come down or see what new improvements pop up in the next gen. I have to agree with the comments regarding Olympus image quality even with the Panny lenses. Have been sorely tempted by the price for reconditioned E-P5 on the Olympus site. $639 and then a 20% off coupon gets us to $511. That's a nice price for what looks to be a hell of a nice kit. (E-M5's for the same price) Sent from my iPhone using Mu-43
For me the biggest difference between my GX1 and my E-M5/E-PM2 is the dynamic range. I can pull a lot more out of seemingly blown highlights and shadows.
