Dpreview posts the Panasonic G2 review
Lots of good words for the new Panasonic G2
The most surprising “Cons” is “New kit lens not as good as predecessor“.
Review scores by DPreview (Thanks Reverse!)
72% Panasonic Lumix DMC-G2
69% Olympus PEN E-PL1
65% Sony Alpha NEX-5
63% Sony Alpha NEX-3
reverse stream swimmer
3 years ago |Review scores by dpreview.com:
63% Sony Alpha NEX-3
65% Sony Alpha NEX-5
69% Olympus PEN E-PL1
72% Panasonic Lumix DMC-G2
spanky
3 years ago |The conclusions of the review are not a surprise, and it reflects the opinion of many users since the camera has come out. The G1 is still a better choice IMO, especially given the current pricing.
Eric
3 years ago |The negative comment about the new kit lens isn’t surprising at all to me. It has a plastic lens mount for f&$# sake. I don’t even need to see a review of it to know I wouldn’t own it for that reason alone.
BornBad
3 years ago |also its slightly bigger, is only 14-42 (instead of 14-45) and doesn’t have a switch for image stablization. i’m really considering buying the g1 and skipping hd-video
greg
3 years ago |@Eric: A plastic mount, so … ?
It’s a light lens to be mounted on mFT bodies, which are also light. In other words, no issue of breaking the (plastic) mount because of weight. One can’t even say that this plastic mount is an aesthetic issue since you can’t even see the mount itself when mounted. It’s really a non-issue.
A metal female mount (on the body) is justified when heavy lenses may be mounted. A metal male mount (on the lens) is justified only when the lens itself is heavy, and/or when it could be mounted on heavy bodies, which is not the case in mFT.
owen
3 years ago |The new kit lens just feels….. cheap! And a loss of range too. I was told by a guy in a camera shop (one staffed by camera geeks) that Panasonic were having to cut production costs to deal with the new economic realities of the world and he thought the 14-42 was a pretty clear sign of it.
Greg, I think it is not just weight bearing, it is long term wear. Plastic is going to be more fragile in your bag or if the camera takes a hit.
As far as I can see all I am missing on my G1, which I got body only for £200
is video and touch focussing, neither of which are a problem for me to be honest, gimmicks not core functionality.
p6
3 years ago |Touchscreen I’ll give you – many CAN see that as a gimmick. Don’t class HD video as a gimmick though. The G2 addressed the serious ommision of the G1 for panny’s sake (not yours). G1 wasn’t competitive against nearly all other cameras that had HD in that bracket.
I’ve got a G2, kit lens is sub par yes, the plastic mount doesn’t bother me. I bought it because it did everything I needed INCLUDING HD Video (720p being my sweet spot), without the video I’d never have considered it (as I didn’t with G1).
A great camera (G1) much improved (G2) with economic downturn reflected in cost cutting on the kit lens… but anyone who buys a M4/3 is going to want to stretch outside the kit lens anyway, buy a couple of nice primes (20mm 1.7 for ex) maybe sell the kit lens on. Great camera and i’m more than happy for a couple of years. I’ll ‘upgrade’ to a new much improved g4/gh4 in a few years, we can’t wait for perfection forever we need to use the stuff today!
owen
3 years ago |p6: HD video depends on the use case to be honest. What are you into buying a camera for? I have 730p vid on my gf1 and have used it twice, for amusing but transitory fun party shots. I am into buying cameras for taking stills. There has been a slow blending of the camcorder and dslr market in the last years, as people realised the dslrs could take video without any hardware changes, and users got the benefit of the lens choices.
HD video means I could shoot a video for professional use on my GH1/G2/D90 etc etc but I think for most its an ‘oh and you can also shoot video” rather than a need. Clearly for you vid was a need and sure the G1 fell down there, but for plenty it is an afterthought. It may change the student and ‘auteur’ film market to be able to use DSLRs for film, and I knwo they shot a House episode on a D90, but the bulk of the TV/film world still works on more traditional video cameras, whether it is digibeta, minidv or newer hd/dvd based storage.
Eric
3 years ago |@Greg
I’ll make some sacrifices in the name of weight savings, but a plastic lens mount isn’t one of them. How much more would a metal mount weigh? 5-10g? That would hardly be an issue. A plastic mount isn’t a weight cutting measure, it’s a cost cutting measure; and I have no desire for cheaply made lenses. The main reason I want Pentax to join m4/3′s is in the hopes that they will release a line of their beautifully constructed aluminum “limted” lenses for the system.
Moskva5
3 years ago |On Amazon.co.uk the G2 body only costs £535, and the G2 single lens kit costs £539. Is the kit lens worth £4? Yes of course it is – you’d have to be a retard to buy the body only (and a retard to set those retail prices).
The G1 single lens kit costs £450. Is HD video and a touchscreen worth £89 – well that depends on whether you want those features – if you do in my opinion its a reasonable premium to pay, or if you dont its a worthwhile sum to save & put towards another lens or beer.
I’ve found the kit lens to be very good on the G2 – I was originally planning to ebay it and buy the 20mm & the 14-140mm, but having tried it now I’m keeping it and have bought the 45-200mm to go with it, which I’m also very happy with.
However, I have also found that under certain circumstances the camera has some absolutely shocking jpeg processing where it joins little dots of colour (specifically red flowers in a green field) into strange blurred blobs with glowing yellow auras around them as if theyd been run through the watercolour and outer glow filters in photoshop – just awful. Yet this is not peresnt at all in the RAW. For what its worth I will be emailing samples to Panasonic – a firmware update is certainly required.
owen
3 years ago |Moskva:
G1 + 14-45 for 329 after cashback http://www.jessops.com/online.store/products/75519/show.html?fh_location=//jessops/en_GB/isvisible=1/$s=g1
G1 + 14-45 with a case, strap, 8gb card, 390 after cashback http://www.warehouseexpress.com/buy-panasonic-g1-red-digital-slr-camera-with-14-45mm-lens-plus-free-8gb-card-and-shoulder-strap/p10000926
I got my body only, new for £200 after the G2 was announced and moments before it was released. I am not saying the G2 is terrible, I am just saying you can get quite a lot for not so much money in the G1.
Moskva5
3 years ago |Owen:
I must say that If I had thought to look and found a G1 body for £200 I would have been extremely tempted to go for that rather than my G2 – an incredible bargain!
p6
3 years ago |@owen, I don’t CARE about YOUR use (you didn’t even buy the camera so be happy with your G1 or whatever). I said for MY needs video was essential! Why do I care if you only use video twice? I make MUSIC PROMO VIDEOS with it *AND* needed a good stills camera for artist promo photographs. Is that O.K with you? I couldn’t do both on a G1 and a GH1 was too expensive. I already have a seperate videocamera but wanted it ‘in one’ thanks, i know my work pattern.
Aside from that it’s commercial suicide to not include HD video of some sort in an advanced (or even compact) cam these days. G1 is quite the ‘odd man out’ in that respect so stop pissing on G2′s chips to justify the fact you are more than happy ‘without video’ I’m happy for you really, no go enjoy as we will enjoy the much improved G2 (and it’s not just touch screen and video that has improved, there are many ergonomic improvements and even some picture quality improvements in certain cases due to changes in Venus Engine II – out of the box)
Humble Sage
3 years ago |I just bought the G1 at Fry’s store for $418–because it was out of the box and the box was lost , though the camera was never a display piece. (It should sell for about $550 now.) I like it, with some reservations, and will probably keep it, but notice all the buzz about new products and even some exclamation point anger-from p6. This is all great fun, or should be for us.
We all know that in a year or so we will be drooling for the next near-perfect camera and thinking of paying premium prices for the newest model while last season’s great model goes on sale, often at 30 to 40 to 50% off. The initial costs of these new models is approaching $800 -$1000.00+. That’s a a lot even for buffs. And I’m not buying into the continual incremental upgrades of about 6 months duration.
I don’t like the OIS on the G1 lens itself, which the G2 remedies, but I can buy the telescopic for the G1 for less than $290 on line. So I get a G1 and a second lens for less than a new G2. And unlike p6, I don’t use this camera for video much.
Even if we are camera crazy (I am), I think costs are big factors and that waiting at least 2-3 years for upgrades is about right. (My MAC Powerbook G4 just got replaced after 7 years, and I can still sell it for $250.00.)
By the way, all this is not to be shared with my wife (she loves my Panasonic TZ3): I gradually introduce her to the delights of new gear, but only after I have reassured myself that I’ve bought the right thing.
They keep us hopping and stoked–I mean the camera companies!