GX-1 compared to EP-3

[NazgulKing]

Man... I was telling myself to wait for the next generation of Panasonic sensors, then seeing you guys talk about the camera, and then the fellow at Soundimageplus: Panasonic GX1 review and user experience - First serious shoot and some interesting discoveries, I am beginning to get tempted. I was planning to go back to M43 with a camera body and the 25/1.4 and maybe a 12-35 zoom...

 

[stetan]

Man... I was telling myself to wait for the next generation of Panasonic sensors, then seeing you guys talk about the camera, and then the fellow at Soundimageplus: Panasonic GX1 review and user experience - First serious shoot and some interesting discoveries, I am beginning to get tempted. I was planning to go back to M43 with a camera body and the 25/1.4 and maybe a 12-35 zoom...

That fellow at soundimageplus really gave a good endorsement of the GX1.

Let's hope he will not be labelled as a "self-proclaimed expert"

 

[rasdeep]

Man... I was telling myself to wait for the next generation of Panasonic sensors, then seeing you guys talk about the camera, and then the fellow at Soundimageplus: Panasonic GX1 review and user experience - First serious shoot and some interesting discoveries, I am beginning to get tempted. I was planning to go back to M43 with a camera body and the 25/1.4 and maybe a 12-35 zoom...

Was it my monitor or is there some really prominent banding on the pics especially the sky on the top of a church. Not sure if that is PP or OOC jpeg :dunno:

 

[seafood]

The EP3 comes with 35 area AF whereas the GX1 comes with 23 area AF. Both AF functions are fast. Very fast. And perfectly adequate for most situations, especially in bright lighting.

In low light the GX1 AF works better and acquired target faster than the EP3. There is hardly any difference between very poor lighting (e.g. was at the Dinosaur Live show with the GX1) and in good light for the GX1 while in poor light the EP3 does slow down. However the EP3 do have an advantage here. The EP3 AF assist light is on the RIGHT side of the lens, out of the way, whereas on the GX1 the AF assist LED is on the LEFT side of the lens. I find this slightly inconvenient and have to adapt slightly the way I hold the lens/camera so as not to get in the way of the light; it is fairly easy to completely block of the AF assist LED in the GX1 but practically inconsequential in the EP3. Once the AF LED light is blocked, the GX1 starts hunting in low light .....

I like most of the implementation of AF better in the GX1. The AF area can be customised down to a very small area. And as if that is not enough, there is even a Pin Point AF mode where the AF area is literally pin point. While in this mode, the focused area is enlarged for visual confirmation. I find this brilliant, especially for macro uses. In MF mode, the AF assist area is enlarged, similar to the EP3 but even better. It allows for customisation of size to full screen. There is also the option of a focusing scale displayed. I would have thought this would be especially good for manual lenses (non m.4/3) but this does NOT work at all for manual lenses. There is no MF assist for manual lenses but overall the LCD screen resolution seems to work fine for pure eyeballing. For manual lenses the EP3's method of MF assist works better.

Even though the GX1 has less AF areas compare to the EP3, the GX1's implementation of focus grouping seems to work better than the EP3's. On touch AF, the EP3's implementation is more responsive; it is literally touch. On the GX1, there is greater pressure to activate the shutter and this can affect framing itself. However because of this difference in responsiveness of the LCD screen, there are often accidental releases in the EP3 and not in the GX1.

 

[fengwei]

Coming from a D700, I also feel the GX1 is a very good camera. Nice size and build quality. G3 still to me too bulky.

G3 too bulky? Let's how your GX1 would look like when you have the viewfinder attached on

After 4 months w GF1 (a better looking camera than GX1 IMO) and 2 months experience w G3, there is no way I'd go back to another M4/3 camera w/o viewfinder or articulated screen

 

[Vulpix0r]

G3 too bulky? Let's how your GX1 would look like when you have the viewfinder attached on

After 4 months w GF1 (a better looking camera than GX1 IMO) and 2 months experience w G3, there is no way I'd go back to another M4/3 camera w/o viewfinder or articulated screen

I can always remove that viewfinder, which is what I want. Never really needed an articulated screen, and it's a bonus if I do have it.

 

[fengwei]

I can always remove that viewfinder, which is what I want. Never really needed an articulated screen, and it's a bonus if I do have it.

I guess each to his own preference but to be honest, G3 isn't that bulky considering its actual size. I feel it's smaller than GF1 other than the extruded viewfinder.

 

[seafood]

I grew up, literally, on Oly's Super Control Panel and customizability of their cameras' control from the days of the C7070. And I loved it. I don't get the Nikons nor Canons. And I was using a Canon before moving to Oly. And I had the pleasure of the D300 for a while. I used the G1 for a while, too. And didn't like it. BTW a while for myself means at least a month, if not more, of using the camera; not just pushing buttons at the counter of some camera shop.

Both the EP3 and GX1 are highly customisable cameras. You can literally set them to function exactly as how you would like the controls to be. And the GX1 takes it a step further. In the EP3, "MySet" are in the Menu Options. With the GX1, it is in the Mode dial. Just like in the C7070 (Olympus should really re-look the design of the C7070 - that is still one of the most ergonomically designed digital camera I have used). Turn the Mode dial and you are there - no menu hunting.

The buttons in the GX1 are more logical. AE/AF Lock in the GX1 is where it makes sense, like all Oly's cameras prior to the EP3 (the E-series dSLRs, EP1/2), at where the thumb can reach. In the EP3, Oly took it out (of course you can put it where you want but the fact remains that Oly did NOT label a button AE/AF Lock ...) and replaced it with a "Movie" button by default (you can still change it back to AE/AF Lock). And I like it that the GX1 has a dedicated AF mode button. The GX1 doesn't allow you to customise the 4 selector buttons unlike the EP3 which allows you to customise 2 of the selectors. The EP3's trump button here is the "Trash" button. Who doesn't want a quick way to delete pics? It is definitely more tedious to delete pics in the GX1. The "Movie" Fn button in the GX1 definitely makes a lot of sense. It is the only way to get into Movie mode. With one step overriding whatever you set in on the Mode Dial. With the EP3, there is actually a Movie Mode in the Selector Dial, which do make the Movie Button a little redundant. I also like the GX1's one button mode to IA (Panny's Super-Everything-Auto Mode); when in doubt or u need one button access for THAT split second moment, reach for this button. On the EP3, it also exist in the Selector Dial as iAuto. Again, debatable which is a more ergonomic way to do things, though I do like the "Movie" button in the GX1 and its position. I don't like the position of the "Movie" button in the EP3. There are also some not very apparent limitations to the functions you can assign to the various EP3's button.

As a test, try to set the Exposure Compensation +/- on either one. Then use it.

As for customising via the LCD screen, the GX1 definitely has the upper hand here. Practically every function is touch related on the LCD screen in the GX1 versus using the "wheel up/down or left/right" on the EP3. I really don't like the "wheel" in the EP1/2/3. I much prefer the 4 buttons selectors as in the Oly's dSLRS. The "wheel" is NOT reassuring, and if I had like that, I would have stayed on with Canon .....just saying There are many occasions when this "loose" wheel actually changed my settings without my knowledge. I love Oly's SCP but they really lost me with the "Live Control". It is not fully apparent to myself even now how I control this "Live Control" ..... With the GX1, it is certainly more intuitive - use your finger on the LCD screen itself if in doubt.

I really like the "Q.Menu" button bringing up a "Quick" menu that is brilliant in its implementation in the GX1. If you guys use Firefox, you'll understand what I mean. Drag and drop on the LCD screen itself. Literally any function. And then access that function in 2 steps.

The EP3 however allows for MORE option in the ability to customise. It even allows for direction of dial and controls (e.g. F-Stops, shutter speeds). What I miss in the GX1 is the ability of the EP3 to define the size of the files and more levels of compression. In the GX1, the file size for jpgs is fixed at either L, M or S and quality of compression is either "Good" or "Std", with or without RAW. For jpgs in the EP3, you can decide the resolutions of L, M and S and the level of compression is SF, F or N.

In summary, I think the EP3 allows for MORE customisation but the GX1 does it in a more logical manner. Both are very flexible and can probably accommodate most photographers who knows what they want.

 

[theITguy]

The EP3 comes with 35 area AF whereas the GX1 comes with 23 area AF. Both AF functions are fast. Very fast. And perfectly adequate for most situations, especially in bright lighting.

In low light the GX1 AF works better and acquired target faster than the EP3. There is hardly any difference between very poor lighting (e.g. was at the Dinosaur Live show with the GX1) and in good light for the GX1 while in poor light the EP3 does slow down. However the EP3 do have an advantage here. The EP3 AF assist light is on the RIGHT side of the lens, out of the way, whereas on the GX1 the AF assist LED is on the LEFT side of the lens. I find this slightly inconvenient and have to adapt slightly the way I hold the lens/camera so as not to get in the way of the light; it is fairly easy to completely block of the AF assist LED in the GX1 but practically inconsequential in the EP3. Once the AF LED light is blocked, the GX1 starts hunting in low light .....

I like most of the implementation of AF better in the GX1. The AF area can be customised down to a very small area. And as if that is not enough, there is even a Pin Point AF mode where the AF area is literally pin point. While in this mode, the focused area is enlarged for visual confirmation. I find this brilliant, especially for macro uses. In MF mode, the AF assist area is enlarged, similar to the EP3 but even better. It allows for customisation of size to full screen. There is also the option of a focusing scale displayed. I would have thought this would be especially good for manual lenses (non m.4/3) but this does NOT work at all for manual lenses. There is no MF assist for manual lenses but overall the LCD screen resolution seems to work fine for pure eyeballing. For manual lenses the EP3's method of MF assist works better.

Even though the GX1 has less AF areas compare to the EP3, the GX1's implementation of focus grouping seems to work better than the EP3's. On touch AF, the EP3's implementation is more responsive; it is literally touch. On the GX1, there is greater pressure to activate the shutter and this can affect framing itself. However because of this difference in responsiveness of the LCD screen, there are often accidental releases in the EP3 and not in the GX1.

Hi, are you saying that the screen for GX1 is not capacitive while the EP3 is? Like the iPhone screen compared to old pressure based LCD screen.

 

[seafood]

I have mainly been restricted indoors the past few days. The outside weather has not really been the best. My comments on the ISO capabilities here are still early impressions and just on the ISO capability and not pertaining to the overall image quality of colour, sharpness and white balance.

The EP3 base ISO is 200 and goes up to 12800. Personally I top out at 1250. In decent lighting, I may find some 1600 pics acceptable if I need the higher shutter speed. Overall the EP3 pic quality degenerates with increasing noise which becomes too prominent for me beyond 1250 in bad lighting situation. At 1600, the noise impedes on sharpness and the overall image starts to be unacceptable to me at 3200, where black is no longer black but becomes a coarse and splotchy array of fine coloured dots in bad lighting condition. In good light, at 3200, the image loses form.

For the GX1, the ISO ranges from 160-12800. The images remains rich, sharp and relatively noise free to 800 (640 for the EP3). I find 1600 very acceptable, bad or good lighting. I even find 3200 acceptable for indoor pics and 6400 acceptable for outdoor pics. The pics remain sharp and relatively noise acceptable to 6400. At 1600, the first prominent deterioration is not noise but decreased dynamic range (DR) and drop in saturation. Of course the decreased saturation could be attributed to poor lighting, too. As mentioned, these are still early impressions. At 3200, the more obvious deleterious effect is saturation in good lighting and noise in bad lighting. Images remains sharp. I would venture here to say that at ISO3200, the GX1 performs as well as the EP3 at ISO1250 in terms of noise and sharpness though there is a prominent decrease in saturation. In good light, 6400 is pretty decent in the GX1.

These impressions are all from OOC jpgs as I have yet to play with the RAW files.

Moving from the EP1 to EP3, I was pretty impressed by the improved ISO capability. I am similarly impressed by the GX1 compare to the EP3.

 

[seafood]

Hi, are you saying that the screen for GX1 is not capacitive while the EP3 is? Like the iPhone screen compared to old pressure based LCD screen.

Both allows for touch and swiping motions as in the iPhone, but as mentioned in the GX1 manual, under "Touch Screen", "This touch screen is a type that detects pressure". In practice the EP3's screen is more sensitive but the GX1 certainly allows more use of the screen. The GX1 is LCD and the EP3 is OLED. Not sure about the capacitive part

 

[theITguy]

Both allows for touch and swiping motions as in the iPhone, but as mentioned in the GX1 manual, under "Touch Screen", "This touch screen is a type that detects pressure". In practice the EP3's screen is more sensitive but the GX1 certainly allows more use of the screen. The GX1 is LCD and the EP3 is OLED. Not sure about the capacitive part

Pressure based screen are called resistive screen. Ep3 screen should be capacitive, where no pressure is required but must use hand without gloves or special glives.

 

[seafood]

To you, GX1 maybe the best m43 but personally, I think G3 is a better buy compared to GX1.

....... I have purchased 2 3rd party battery for GX1 from one of the shops advertised in this forum and now waiting for delivery. Anyway, should be fine as I got 2 batteries fro 7D from them weeks back.

Coming from a D700, I also feel the GX1 is a very good camera. Nice size and build quality. G3 still to me too bulky.

Precisely!

I had many other cameras, J1, GF3, G3, Nex5N, etc but each and every one of them has their pros and cons.

I have been trying to find 1 single camera with small enough lens and take good enough photos, esp at low light. GX1 seems to fit the bill right now, with a good ISO performance even up to ISO3200, great video quality, great build quality, lots of buttons and small and light enough to fit into my cargo pants!!! I just need GX1 with 14-42X or 20mm lens with me to take on the world now every where, anywhere, anytime...

.......After 4 months w GF1 (a better looking camera than GX1 IMO) and 2 months experience w G3, there is no way I'd go back to another M4/3 camera w/o viewfinder or articulated screen

Personally, I have not been using the GX1 much because of weather and work commitments ...... what do you guys think of the G3 or GX1's IQ :dunno:

 

[arsene]

I own a GF-1 and am using it interchangeably with my wife's E-PL2. With the GF-1 I hardly shoot above ISO 800. If the scene is dark, I use a tripod and longer exposure to counter it. I prefer the GF-1's better buttons / menu layout than the E-PL2 (which seem to be in a mess).

My question is whether there is a significant upgrade in the PQ of the GX-1 over the GF-1, and particularly in the area where ISO > 800? Is it worth the upgrade? Or should I be waiting for a more capable camera like the Sony Nex 7?

 

[seafood]

I own a GF-1 and am using it interchangeably with my wife's E-PL2. With the GF-1 I hardly shoot above ISO 800. If the scene is dark, I use a tripod and longer exposure to counter it. I prefer the GF-1's better buttons / menu layout than the E-PL2 (which seem to be in a mess).

My question is whether there is a significant upgrade in the PQ of the GX-1 over the GF-1, and particularly in the area where ISO > 800? Is it worth the upgrade? Or should I be waiting for a more capable camera like the Sony Nex 7?

If both yourself and your wife uses m4/3 cameras, then you'll save a lot sharing lenses. And if both of you are in the habit of carrying both cameras around, you'll also save on weight.

Going the Sony way means another system. May give you better ISO sensors (will definitely give you another sensor) but you'll lose out on the availability of lenses. Have you check out the latest m4/3 lenses, e.g. 25/f1.4, 45/f1.8 and the 12/f2?

 

[icy2fire]

Personally, I have not been using the GX1 much because of weather and work commitments ...... what do you guys think of the G3 or GX1's IQ :dunno:

I just had the cam for 3 days. Love it a lot. I think the pq is very good if you expose it right. Almost no noise at 1600. The pz lens is also very good wide open at both ends.

But I think my hands shake a lot more when compared to using dslr. Any recommended holding position or is my only solution the LVF?

 

[rasdeep]

OP, I think the thread below may shared the same sentiments as you except you go into more details with various posts and also being very objective.

My take on the GX1 vs. EP3 debate [Page 1]: Micro Four Thirds Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

I am looking forward to hear from you on ISO performance but we all know the G3/GX1 sensor will definitely be cleaner at high ISO but what I would like to see are some comparisons (if possible) and if high ISO performance is really significant enough. One other thing I am interested to know if the cleaner pictures from GX1 compromised by lesser detail at high ISO?

 

[seafood]

In the earlier days, the road to great IQ passed right through the RAW way. Then, the files were smaller and the Imaging Engines of the cameras processing the OOC jpgs were still young. And I guess, I, along with many others were more enthusiastic. Imagine spending 3 minutes (and this after MUCH experimenting) a file. Without a break and any other form of interruptions (domestic or otherwise), in an hour you would be able to come out with 20 pics tops. In worst case scenarios, an hour would only produce 6 pics!

And you would still wonder if that is the best you can do. Of course this is too tedious, especially if you had to work and work does not have anything to do with digital photography! Then 2 things happened to myself. First, I looked hard in despair at the hard drives piling up, and all the RAW files waiting to be "processed". And second, I happened to start buying and using Oly cameras. Instead of processing RAW, I started to just delete the RAW files. Then I started to shoot RAW selectively. Now, I use RAW very selectively.

And the EP3 continues in the Oly's tradition of very usable OOC jpgs. Right from the first day, there was not much fiddling around with the camera's settings other than Noise Reduction (NR). The EP3 improved on the EP1 and earlier E dSLR's indoor WB. The colours especially skin tone comes out beautifully. The hallmark of Oly's colours, I felt, is the skin tone and fabulous blues. Bokeh, blurred backgrounds, blue skies and warm sunsets were rendered silkily smooth with no banding.

On the other hand, the GX1's OOC jpgs seem different. It certainly has lost some appeal. The colours seem more subdued. To be fair, in most circumstances, it does seem accurate in depicting objects but when it comes to skin tone, especially indoor, the rendition isn't quite as pleasing as the EP3's. So, it is back to RAW …..

Anyway, I have been adjusting the camera's setting, and I do find after a few more days of trial and errors, more of the OOC jpgs seem more acceptable.These comments are made mainly with respect indoor conditions, and often under difficult lighting with different light sources. Overall, the main differences seem to stem from decreased saturation in the GX1. If anything the GX1 may, sometimes, render the WB more faithfully especially with regard objects but the EP3 certainly renders more pleasingly especially with regards skin tones. Without fiddling around, the EP3 definitely shoots more keepers than the GX1. Indoor.

BTW both LCDs do NOT reflect well the pics though the EP3's LCD tend to "promise" nicer pics so it is fairly pointless to adjust colours using either's LCD.

 

[seafood]

I just had the cam for 3 days. Love it a lot. I think the pq is very good if you expose it right. Almost no noise at 1600. The pz lens is also very good wide open at both ends.

But I think my hands shake a lot more when compared to using dslr. Any recommended holding position or is my only solution the LVF?

Yupe ..... very good at ISO1600 :thumbsup: In good conditions, even 6400 is acceptable!

With regards the shake part. When using dSLR, the right hand tends to be able to grip and hence help with steadying. Sometimes, the right (esp if it is your dominant hand) can literally shoot one hand .......

With these "little" cameras, it is practically impossible to grip comfortably with the right hand so I tend to "rest more" on the left and lightly squeeze with the right. Anyway just my way, I am sure you'll find a way to suit yourself

 

[pinholecam]

On the other hand, the GX1's OOC jpgs seem different. It certainly has lost some appeal. The colours seem more subdued. To be fair, in most circumstances, it does seem accurate in depicting objects but when it comes to skin tone, especially indoor, the rendition isn't quite as pleasing as the EP3's. So, it is back to RAW …..

Anyway, I have been adjusting the camera's setting, and I do find after a few more days of trial and errors, more of the OOC jpgs seem more acceptable.These comments are made mainly with respect indoor conditions, and often under difficult lighting with different light sources. Overall, the main differences seem to stem from decreased saturation in the GX1. If anything the GX1 may, sometimes, render the WB more faithfully especially with regard objects but the EP3 certainly renders more pleasingly especially with regards skin tones. Without fiddling around, the EP3 definitely shoots more keepers than the GX1. Indoor.

BTW both LCDs do NOT reflect well the pics though the EP3's LCD tend to "promise" nicer pics so it is fairly pointless to adjust colours using either's LCD.

I tend to find Panny colors to be rather accurate. This is as opposed to being pleasing. So your findings on color is pretty reflective of Panny approach to colors from my experience with GF1 and G3.
Many ppl have used different settings to get the colors they prefer. Some have used a W/B bias (eg +1 magenta, +1 red), others have used a desaturated 'Vibrant' and/or combination of the two.
Personally, I find myself to be rather accepting of any default color of any brand camera, to me there is no real skin tone since it varies with lighting, ambient colors picked off the environment, exposure, ppl to ppl variances. Of course this is personal preference.

Totally agree on LCDs.