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!

Question Re: GX1/OM-D

Discussion in 'This or That? (MFT only)' started by andrew00, Sep 24, 2012.

  1. andrew00

    andrew00 Mu-43 Regular

    Sep 9, 2010

    Can anyone who uses the OM-D and/or GX1 please give some thoughts please.

    I currently use a Sony Nex-7 for photos and video but recently tried a friends hacked GH2 and it was really impressive - really sharp and detailed in a way the Sony wasn't and I'm pondering the new GH3 for my video work, especially a short I want to make soon.

    If I did make the switch, I'd also want to grab a smaller camera for stills and I'm looking at a GX1 as it's fairly cheap now for the body, or perhaps the OM-D if it was a smart call. I like shooting with flash so would prob use the FL-14 flash on the Panny or the Oly's slot in flash which google tells me is a 10GN flash.

    In fact I've often shot with two cameras at the same time in the past to keep things quick, both so the flashes can recycle and the cameras can write to the cards, the latter of which is always a bugbear of mine (why I never warmed to the X100 for example as it was so slow), as I like to have a somewhat continuous, hypnotic flash going off. Hence why the appeal of the small m4/3's as you can duo them easily.

    I was having a look on the web at GX1/OM-D images and was looking at the photographer Terry Richardson's tumblr and looking at his exif details saw that he's recently been using a GX1 and GF1 together.

    The GF1 images were good, but I really like the quality of the GX1 images, they have a really flat feel that I like, the skin tones look smooth and accurate and they have a quality that I can't really describe but has an almost snapshot quality that is cool, almost nostalgic. Terry became famous for using snapshot cameras, but either way the GX1 images have this in a way the GF1 images don't, it's an evenness that I like.

    Here are some examples - please note, as Terry is an edgy fashion photographer these are ALL NSFW so if you're sensitive then be warned.

    GF1 - Terry Richardson's Diary | Stella at my studio #2
    GX1 - Terry Richardson's Diary | Stella at my studio #1

    GF1 - Terry Richardson's Diary | Bo at my studio #2
    GX1 - Terry Richardson's Diary | Kristel at my studio.
    GX1 - Terry Richardson's Diary | Tessa at my studio.

    GF1 - Terry Richardson's Diary | Georgina at my studio
    GX1 - Terry Richardson's Diary | Jade at my studio.

    Now, I don't know the lighting, I'm assuming from most his shots it's models on a wall by his big windows shot with on board flash, but certainly in the first two images the models is wearing the same short suggesting they were shot at the same time and the GX1 images are nicer imo.

    I was wondering therefore if anyone can point out if this is normal behaviour for the GX1 or if there's some different processing going on here? As I said I like to shoot two cameras at once and if I can get two GX1's for the price of an OM-D and get images like the ones above then I'd be really happy.

    So yes, can anyone please offer any thoughts on the above, am I seeing the GX1's magic or is there some PP mojo going on I'm not seeing.

    To say - I know both cameras have decent IQ, and I know the Nex-7 also has good IQ, I'm not asking about that. What I'm interested in is the interesting combo of flat image, even contrast, good skin tones and the slight lofi feel I'm seeing in the images. As in, to me they don't look especially 'digital', they have a slight film P+S feel or something that I like, so my interest is specifically in that feel that I'm curious in.

    Also, does the OM-D have the same ability to makes images like that and if so would y'all recommend it over the GX1 therefore? The EVF+Fl-14 flash + ibis to help with things like the Panny 25mm would be pretty sweet. Obviously I'm seeing something in the images so I'm all about that feel, not specific a/b's of IQ if that makes sense.

    Thanks in advance for any advice!
    a x
  2. craftysnapper

    craftysnapper Mu-43 Regular

    The difference between these images is down to the lighting and not the camera.

    For example Stella#1 is taken with frontal on board flash with no diffusion, hence the flat lighting (no modeling) and thin sharp dark edged shadow on the wall.

    Stella #2 is taken with window light or diffused flash from the right and hence the softer light and better modeling of the features and softer longer shadow on the wall.
    • Like Like x 1
  3. I have to say that I prefer the GF1 images, but it is all down to the lighting. The harsh flash used in the GX1 shots makes it hard for me to make any direct comparison between the two cameras based on these examples.
  4. andrew00

    andrew00 Mu-43 Regular

    Sep 9, 2010
    hey, thanks for the replies!

    do you think that it's simply the difference in lighting then? as when i see the images to my eyes it looks more to do with colour and the slightly lofi feel of the images vs specifically just the lighting.

    although i do certainly agree the lighting source is different - aka the gx1 images do have more on camera.
  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.