ePhotozine says: Why buy a DSLR when you can have the G3? :)

ePhotozine (Click here) posted a new Panasonic G3 review. And I love that part of their conclusion text: “With such impressive image quality and high speed focusing, the reasons for buying a true Digital SLR seem to be becoming less and less important, and the added bonus of a much more compact system is making the Micro Four Thirds systems much more appealing, especially with the number of high quality lenses available increasing.” And of course the camera gets “Highly Recommended” by the reviewer team.

If you want that camera click those direct search links to find the G3: Amazon, Olympus US store, Adorama, B&H, eBay.

  • Because i’d like more shots per battery charge, regardless of how much i AF before taking one shot.
    I’d like to have more lens selection. Lens that are cheap and performs rather well, not lens that are physically small, yet performs no diff from PnS lens, makes it relatively expensive.
    Yes,I’m on the SLR side, and that’s just my point of view.
    On the other side, i am seriously taking a look at MILC, but the price just aint gonna drop, yet.It’s just overpriced right now. IMHO it should be priced competitively against DSLR to stand any chance. MILC should be shrinkage of size and pricetag, not just bloating of the price.

    • Steve

      I agree. I’d like to get an milc but the G3 is more expensive than a D5100 or 600D, which frankly have better dynamic range (very important to me), amongst many other things.

      Lens choice is annoying too. There’s no fast standard zoom and if I buy an Oly lens it won’t work so well on a Panny body, and vice versa for things like CA reduction, which I now take for granted on an dslr. There’s a reasonable choice of primes now, but still no fast tele zoom or fast standard zoom which are the default of most photographers. I’m seriously interested in the NEX-C3 but the lens choice is a joke. That’s not a system camera – it’s a tease.

      When are they gonna release an f/2.8 12-35 or similar ? I’m really hoping that as M43 matures they start to create entry level and pro level gear; esp the pro level lenses.

      I would have thought that milc should be cheaper than dslr as they save on the pentaprism, mirror, PDAF module, etc. Instead they’re more expensive and the E-P3 is absurdly so. It’s priced like an exclusive Apple product for fanboys. Not only that but they depreciate faster so if I bought one and didn’t like it, I would lose a lot selling it on, far more than if I bought a Canon/Nikon/Sony dslr.

      So why buy a dslr ? Silly question really – based on gushing enthusiasm not reality. I like this site…. but sometimes…

      • Steve

        OOps, forgot to mention the most obvious thing – dof. Bigger sensors make it easier the throw out the background. AFAIK for the same fov and hence distance to subject etc, a mft 25mm f/1.4 (expensive) has the same dof as an aps-c 35 f/2 (reasonable) which is the same as a FF 50 f/2.8 (lots of budget zooms cover this range like the Tammy 28-75 f/2.8).

        So honestly, I don’t see mft as the future. I see FF sensors in nex sized bodies as the future.

        • Nick Clark

          Agree wholeheartedly that MFT needs a fast standard zoom – personally I’d love to see the Panasonic 12-50/f2.5-3.3 that was rumoured a while back.

          That said, the MFT lens line-up is rapidly filling the holes. A fast standard zoom and fast medium tele (35-100/f2.8) and most bases will be covered…

          I disagree though about FF sensors in NEX sized bodies as being the futures. The current APS NEX lenses are already huge, I’d hate to see something that’d cover a 35mm sensor :/

          • Steve

            Yep, that 12-50 would be a step in the right direction !

            For the ff NEX, I’d just like a set of fast pancakes. Of course, I’m dreaming…

            It’s probably more likely that Canon or Nikon will surprise us with a 1″ sensor mirrorless cam with a collapsible 9-40…. ?…

            Oooh boy these drugs are strong ;-)

        • “I see FF sensors in nex sized bodies as the future.”

          Well, get a M9, if you can afford it. m43 are a good comprimise between size, interoperability, cost and IQ. But you won’t have everything, never.

          And if we’ll ever have “FF sensors in nex sized bodies”, you’ll probably want Medium Format in a P&S body by the time.

      • MP Burke

        In the UK the G3 is already cheaper than the D5100. let alone the 600D. E.g. at Camera World, the G3 with kit lens is £529, D5100 with kit lens is £570, and EOS D600 is £688.

        • Steve

          Wow, here the G3 is $6347 (£510), the 600D is $6220 (£500) and the D5100 is $6000 (£480) all with kit lenses. Are Nikon or Canon doing rebates in the UK ? If not, those UK prices are a rip off ! No wonder ppl think the G3 is cheap. Maybe I should become an Ebay reseller…

  • Funny how the two (out of three) cons of the G3 – “Short battery life” and “Grip could be better” – can be easily addressed by optional grip with battery compartment.

  • Anonymous

    Why buy a g3 when u can have a dslr at half the price?

    • 1212

      dont ask…. they are paid by panasonic for the review.

      • Robbie

        u’d better have proofs that they were paid or else….

    • Simon

      Show me a half-prized dslr with similar image quality, full-hd AF video recording and swivel lcd.

    • Half the price? The G3 is $699 with the kit zoom! How much are the D5100 and T3i/600D, the comparable DSLRs from Nikon and Canon? Those are more expensive ($100 more for the Nikon and $200 more for the Canon), bulkier, and have smaller viewfinders and LCDs without touch. Their AF is also slow in liveview, so using the D5100’s and T3i/600D’s swivel screens to take pictures/movies with AF will be frustrating.

      Even with the smaller sensor, IQ is up there too:

      “On the surface then, another great result for the Lumix G3’s new sensor, which in this test kept up with – and in some respects even surpassed – the Nikon D5100’s output” (http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Panasonic_Lumix_DMC_G3/noise_vs_Nikon_D5100.shtml ).

      All things considered, the G3 is a very good value.

      @1212: Other sites seem to think the G3 is a good camera? Are they paid as well?

      • Steve

        Here in HK the G3 sells for slightly more than the D5100 and is about the same as the 600D, all with their kit zooms.

        From the tests I have seen, the dslrs and the NEX-C3 seem to retain more saturation, definition, DR and colour accuracy at high ISO so the results are better imo. G3 is very good but not better.

        • Interesting. Probably because it’s newer; still pre-order only on amazon, but MSRP is lower than the other two.

          The Nex-c3 seems nice, but I’d probably pick up the Nex-3 if upgrading from a P&S. Just saw one at the mall for $499, new with the kit zoom. With the current firmware, you get the picture effects and the usability is improved.

          • Steve

            High-volume stuff like the popular Nikon/Canon dslrs are often discounted more than the mft stuff, which don’t drop that much, plus there seems to a be a premium to pay if you wanna be the first…so the G3 doesn’t look like a bargain here; quite the opposite really.

            BTW that Cameralabs test seems a bit partisan. If you check out the dxo tests you get a more normative set of results. They say that the D5100 has just fractionally better snr than NEX-C3, and they are both almost 1 stop better than the G3. At iso200, the D5100 has 2.5EV wider DR. A jpeg only holds 8ev or something like that IIRC but the wider dr allows a different tone curve so the picture can be processed to retain more detail and colour at the extremes, something Cameralabs made no effort to do and they make no comment on dr at all.

            • bilgy_no1

              DXO blablabla

              • Mr. Reeee

                DXO. If spec sheets and charts are interesting and ever so important, go for it.

                Every camera is made up of a series of compromises. The very marginal improvements in IQ of APSC DSLRs over M4/3 does NOT outweigh the size and weight penalty you pay EVERY time you carry or use a DSLR. Everything about them is larger, bulkier and heavier.

                And if short battery life is a real issue buy TWO extra. I carry 2, shoot mainly manually and one will go pretty much all day.

                I carry my GH2 and 3 or 4 extra lenses and barely feel it. Granted, I use mainly manual prime lenses and the 7-14mm f4. The biggest and heaviest lens I carry is a Nikon 60mm macro!

                • Steve

                  Actually, dxo results are interesting to ppl who shoot raw and do PP; but I suspect you know that.

        • AC

          Wow, u guys talk photography like some rocket science, DR, FOV, FOC…etc.

          I’ve seen amazing photos from iPhone and crappy photos from 5DMK, what’s your pt of view on that? I won’t say it’s all about the photographer cos we work hand in hand with our tools. But what’s the purpose of photography when you can’t capture anything but the hardware capability of a camera / lens? Soulless.

          The debate of cameras / lens is just pure meaningless. IMHO, the best lens is our eyes and the best camera is our experiences, that’s reflects on your photography. Period.

          Leave your computer, go out and start taking some photos with your choice of camera already.

          • Steve

            What’s FOC ?

            You might not know what dof is because you have never used a camera that can create a very shallow depth of field (depth of the focus zone) ? Fov is field of view – what you see – wide angle or telephoto…

            A lot of photography is right time, right place, right gear. There are things you simply cannot do with an iPhone but that doesn’t mean you can’t take a good picture with one and then photoshop it to make it WOW.

            It’s raining heavily here so much as I’d love to be out shooting……but as soon as the weather breaks, I’m gone…. ;-)

          • Nick Clark

            There are amazing tools, and there are people with an amazing photographic eye. In many cases the former may not be united with the latter and you’ll get good photos with a terrible camera and terrible photos with a great one…

            But, when a bloody good photographer uses and understands a bloody good camera – that’s when *great* photography happens…

          • Anonymous

            Tool won’t replace talent, creativity and knowledge
            Talent, creativity and knowledge won’t replace tool.

            iPhone’s camera, used within its limits, can produce as good as talent allows it to do.

            Go ahead and try to freeze a python’s tongue without sending a flash in its eyes, we’ll what tool you need ;)

  • J-Man

    “Why buy a DSLR when you can have the G3? :)”
    Why buy a G3 when I have a 1DIII.

    And it rhymes, FTW. :)

    • Growers

      Or just maybe the G3 is a really good alternative to a more traditional DSLR?

  • I always believed that G3 is the best overall MFT camera,
    its practically as small as e-p3, and yet it has excellent EVF built in which makes it much smaller then e-p3+evf combo, not to say 600$ cheaper as well :)
    did i mention that for half the price you get a swivel-LCD and a better sensor? (to my eyes, needs to be tested in raw)

  • Redkite

    The third con is “Lacks in camera image stabilisation.” I can never understand why reviewers often say this about the G cameras but they never say that about Nikon and Canon cameras that also use lens based IS. Why is that I wonder?

    • Agrivar

      I think its called “Group think”. All in the oly camp always say this. But as you mentioned, no one says this about the Top2 camera manufacturers. Canon and Nikon. Both use Lens based IS. Same as Panasonic. So is this a “con”? I dont think so. Its rubbish !!

      When folks say something enough times, its becomes fact rather than reality. The IBIS vs OIS argument is one such.

      • but m43 lens mount is shared by both oly and pana. not all lenses are designed with ois in mind. if i choose a pana body, i would be somewhat limited in my lens choices if i want stabilisation.

        • Nick Clark

          But the same argument can essentially be applied to the CaNikon systems (not saying that they’re the same mount).

          Not all of their lenses are made with OIS, and the ones that don’t have it tend to be the same as the Panasonic lenses that don’t – ie. primes and wide-angles…

      • Mr. Reeee

        I don’t think that Leica or Hasselblad have stabilization either.

        • IS is important for video. With IBIS We could use fast primes and get rid of shaky video.

          • spam

            Olympus disable IBIS in video mode

            • Valk

              Not in the E-P3 ;-)

              • spam

                According to Imaging Resources and other test sites it does, just like other Pens and most of Olympus (and other brands) compact cameras with sensor shift stabilisation. Sony doesn’t on A33/A55, but have heating problems and switched to lens stabilisation on NEX to avoid this problem (and noise from the stabilisation unit). They might solve it eventually, but for now lens stabilisation seem to be the best solution for video.

                From IR: “Although the E-P3 provides image stabilization during movie capture, this is achieved in software, and the sensor shift stabilization system is disabled throughout.”


            • Didn’t know about it. That is …

          • Mr. Reeee

            Drink less coffee and shake disappears. ;-)

            • Already switched to green tea
              .. and Zen archery :)

        • Diane B

          And none of the lenses I’ve kept for my 5D have stabilization. (long time Canon shooter). None of the fast primes, not the 24-70L, not my 28-75, my 12-24 and I’ve owned few Canon mounts that did–only 70-200 and my old 28-135. I’ve never had an issue understanding good technique is necessary, tripod when under certain circumstances— or other means of support. Nice for long lenses but otherwise….

      • For my purposes, lack of IBIS is very close to a deal breaker. In fact, I likely already would have bought a Panny camera if they IBIS.

        • Simon

          Last week I shot official pictures of an university function with my E-P2 and 20mm 1.7 lens. Available light only, pictures turned out great. And guess what…I somehow forgot to turn IBIS on. Image stabilization is useless for freezing motion anyways. I think IS does only make sense for longer zoom lenses – and here OIS (as well as canon/nikon lens-based IS) is more efficient than IBIS. Another pro of OIS is you can integrate special OIS versions optimized for video etc. in certain lenses (like Sony with its steadyshot IS does).

          That’s what I say as an Oly “fan”.

          • Neonart

            I’ve found IS to be very useful coupled with fast lenses! Ot wont produce miracles, but you get increase your keeper rate.

            Of course, if you have fast action and shooting at 1/15th you’re likely to get a blurred image! But with IS you’re far less likely to get blurry shots due to camera/hand shake.

            I LOVE my PL 25 1.5 & the E5 with IS! No flash, no problem in most cases.

          • That’s great, Simon. Really. I wish that my hands were steady enough to get good low light shots without IS, but sadly, due to physical issues, they aren’t.

    • its very simple, with ibis you have the advantage/option to use it with ALL lenses you mount on your ep body. Wether you need it, depends on your self.

  • Andi

    You are also limited if you are looking for a Canon(or Sigma, Nikon,….) 50mm with OIS…
    Or a 24mm.

  • SteveD

    The “other” photography forums I look at have discussed these issues and the ultimate issue is that lots of enthusiasts who have tried MILCs don’t like the EVF compared to the larger optical viewfinder of a DSLR. Not an argument of any kind, they just like the optical one better. Second reason is usually the currently smaller set of AF lenses.

    • Anonymous

      But the EVF on the Panasojic G3 & GH2 gives a larger view than all crop sensor DSLR and is virtually the same size as those on full-frame cameras.

      • Bingo. APS-C DSLR’s generally have pretty poor viewfinders, especially the entry level models.

    • Larger optical viewfinder?! The G3 has the largest possible viewfinder (0,7× magnification) for a prosumer camera!

      • edited to blanco :-)

      • Steve

        EVFs can’t handle high contrast which is sometimes when the screen isn’t useful either so that’s a serious issue for me. They also look crap in low light.

        • bilgy_no1

          And in lowlight, an OVF shows very little. Especially the smaller ones in entry/mid level dslrs

          • Steve

            OVF use depends on the lens, and in low light, most dslr users have a bright prime and that works fine.

            • bilgy_no1

              Same goes for m4/3 and the EVF: 20mm f/1.7, 25mm f/1.4, even the 25mm f/0.95 will all help the EVF in low light, just like a bright prime will help the OVF in a dslr.

      • SteveD

        I’m just repeating the complaint. VF preferences are very subjective, of course. OTOH, it’s not unusual for folks to compare the current m43 EVFs to pro level DSLRs.

  • Per

    Spent a few hours by the sea with my G3 and I can confirm that image quality is very good – definately better than my Olympus E-P1. My MF lenses Voigthländer, Zeiss, Leica wre easy to use on the G3. This camera is a cross-over between GF1 and GH2 and usability is very good, a lot better than E-P1.
    I picked my drowned Nikon D300 from my little musem: Beside the G3 it looks absurdely gigantic….. But of course it’s egonomy and handling is surperior. As mentioned above there are many lenses available at different cost and quality levels – not least used lenses.
    On the other hand, today a brought G3, E-P1, two zooms and 4 prime lenses and it was not heavy to carry. I am old, lazy and like to travel light :-) then m43 is the ideal solution!

    • SteveO

      Went to a lawn show at Lars Anderson Auto Museum today and simply brought my TZ-5, not having gone the mFT route (yet) and not wanting to attract attention with a DSLR. I wasn’t after ultimate image quality, obviously, but if I’d had an mFT I would have certainly taken it.

      And those with DSLR’s actually looked kind of silly at an event like this, never mind they’re simply awkward to carry around. Beginning to look a bit like dinosaurs to those aware of mFT’s.

      Their place? If you’re shooting action or birds in flight. If you want a nice bright optical viewfinder (now we’re talking big bodies with pentaprisms). If you want a full selection of pro caliber glass and weathersealed bodies. If you want to use larger zooms and have them handle well on the body. If you’re shooting a paying event/wedding where perception matters. If you want ultimate IQ (talking price is no object D3s, etc. here).

      Good entry level DSLR kits are also still quite a bit less expensive: D3100 for $500 vs. G3 for $700. But this will change should the G3 drop in price as its predecessors (G1, G2) did.

  • tigermanrocks

    I think the great thing about m4/3 is that there is a choice. If you think using an EVF all the time is the way then Pana works for you. Compactness and stability to use legacy lenses? Oly. Need the grip of a DSLR without add ons? Pana. The biggest problem has been IMHO the companies copying each other’s focal lengths so duplicating the lens market. Fast mid zoom? >100mm fast prime? The format is mature enough to warrant these now. Should another camera body manufacturer join that would make things really interesting.

  • That´s not the point. G3 like any other cam is a tool. Sometimes this tool, is valid for you, other, simply not.
    Some people would prefer the real thing, a dslr instead of a tiny dslr imitation plenty of limitations, for their jobs.
    For other purpouses, I would like to have enought money to buy an m9, a medium format Hasselblad, or a fullframe DSLR, but no I don´t have this amount of money
    So I choose m4/3 because is enought for my hobbie, for my usual prints,because the limitations of the system, aren´t really limitations for me, because is more discret for street photography, because I usually shoot between 200 and 800 iso, for the weight,for the quality/price relation, because we have the fab and discret 20mm pana, some excellet pana-leica glasses, and now at last some superb oly lenses. and finally because the final product -the pic- has a hight level of quality, so I prefer for all this reasons m 4/3 rangefinder stiled cams, and primes, instead voluminous zooms and mini dslr imitations.

    • arguros

      In answer to Steve0

      I couldn’t agree more with your comment.
      Let me also add that in order to get a better handling than the G3, you just need to go for the D7000.
      The D5100 seems like a toy in comparison.

    • Exactly!
      If i could efford, i would buy a m9.
      But m43 is good enough for me, and the G3 is a hell of a camera. It offers identical IQ to the DSLR range in the same Price range (600D,D5100) and offers a better AF System, a way better Viewfinder, even if its electronic, with a wide range of lenses. And on top of that, its more compact, with super compact lenses relative to those CanNIkon lenses.
      And thanks to the Oly 45/1.8, the biggest negative, DOF aspect, is past as well (when the lens becomes available :D )
      So: way to go Oly/Pana!

      I could be tempted to change to Samsungs NX System if they manage to update their sensor to at least present 16MP Sony Sensor… but i really doubt it. But Sony NEX is just a fashion toy for wanna-be kids because they want a SONY!

      • SteveO

        Samsung could challenge mFT if they introduce a new low-noise sensor in the NX20 and NX200 (supposedly TBA later this month).

        Samsung’s current sensor/processor renders detail and colors very nicely, but noise becomes noticeable at fairly low ISO’s (based on comparative JPEG’s on DPR). They have a sensible body in the NX10 and their collapsible kit zoom keeps things almost mFT compact. Their lens roadmap also seems pretty comprehensive.

        Sony so far just isn’t cutting it for me, an excellent sensor saddled by insufficient lenses and odd bodies (very subjective, I know). Their NEX-7 may change this.

        mFT? Panasonic and Olympus have really been pressing hard and I’m loving it, so many recent new body intros and they’ve built up a nice ensemble of lenses as well. The full featured G3 and the coming very compact E-PL3 with IBIS really present some contrasting choices at a reasonable price. What’s not to like?

        These are exiting times, and the rumor Fuji may enter mFT only makes it more so.

  • Bob B.

    Any chance the G3 will be offered with the 14mm, f/2.5 as a kit lens?????

  • DSLRs and m43 have their place. For me, m43 has solved the (daylight) street/travel part of the equation, where my 7d is used for sports, lower light, or, as someone else said, when looks *do matter*. But, conceptually, I feel much closer to my m43 gear than DSLR – I simply feel more comfortable with smallish, self deprecating gear, as it allows for a more direct way of shooting, without “scaring” people with a bazooka sized zoom pointing at their faces – I prefer the spontaneous reactions that you get when your subject feels like you have a P&S, not a “pro” camera.

    • Chekai


    • SteveO

      Maybe the next mFT accessory will be a D3 sized “casing” that says Nikkon or Cannon on it into which you can slip your mFT for such “appearance matters” events :)!

  • elflord

    Shallow depth of field
    Better selection of lenses
    entry level DSLR cameras are cheaper than the G3, so one could turn the question on its head.

    • SteveO

      My guess, the lower price of entry level DSLR’s won’t hold up. The G2 quickly dropped to the $500-550 range and the G3 may well also.

      Mechanical penta-mirror TTL viewfinding systems likely are also more labor intensive and therefore costly to build than the electronic systems in mirrorless cameras. Once the global shutter truly arrives, the same will apply to mechanical shutters. This may be pretty close:

      Once this happens, it is conceivable that mFT’s could drop in price much as LCD TV’s did once the current new adopter’s bubble passes.

      • elflord

        That would certainly make me happy. I’d love a pocketable camera to supplement my DSLR system but the GF3 is $500 body only (forget the kit lenses). Add the 20mm f/1.7 and it’s up to $900 for something that is marketed as “entry level”. If it shipped with the 20mm as a kit lens for 700 or less, I’d buy it faster than you could say “he’d buy it”.

  • David

    With the G3 quoted as fast AF. Has anyone seen a comparison of the Ep3 versus G3 for AF?

    I think it would be interesting to see if there is much of a difference. Although the test I want, I don’t see people doing. Shoting a kid on a swing you in front and try to track them. This is not possible with my olympus E3, but oddly is with my SD14.

  • bilgy_no1

    I think the statement is absolutely right: for (rough guess) 80% of DLSR buyers, a m4/3 works just as well. Maybe even better, because the smaller size allows the user to bring it along to many more occassions and shoot more photos. The 80% I’m talking about is the entry level enthousiast who up till now buy D3000, 1000D, D5000, 500D etc in large numbers and don’t use more than the kit lens + 55-200mm zoom.

    In fact, I think this point had already been reached with the E-PL2. Double zoom kit available for €600, relatively cheap add-on lenses for those two zooms. Add the 20mm Lumix (ultimate portability and low light advantage) and you’re done for years… Now, with the even faster E-PL3, it becomes an easier choice still.

  • Why? Because Micro Four Thirds doesn’t even offer half of the lens options a decent SLR system does, and because Micro Four Thirds cameras still cannot properly use the Four Thirds lenses which already (still?) do exist. There is no single mirrorless system yet that would offer even one fast (as in aperture) zoom lens, let alone an only moderately fast telephoto lens, let alone focal lengths above 300mm, and Micro FT doesn’t offer a teleconverter either.

    Why should I choose a system that would drastically reduce my photographic options in lenses even compared to the dying Four Thirds system?

    Oh, and by the way, I wouldn’t complain if Four Thirds had not been thrown out and left there dying with the brand new mirrorless system to feed on its carcass.

    • andy

      You can find all these lense requirements with simple cheap adapters on m4/3.
      NEX & m4/3 you can use c-mounts,canon,nikon,olmpus,zeiss…the list goes on.
      The “lack of lenses” is a very pointless arguement.
      If anything your photography options are wider with mirrorless systems.

      • Nick Clark

        Just one thing – AF.

        MF with adapted lenses is fine for some things, less fine for others.

        There is no fast aperture standard zoom available for MFT with fully functional auto focus. And when you consider the type of things one would use a fast standard zoom for, fast AF is very important.

        • andy

          I dont think there is a DSLR zoom lens thats as fast at AF than the m4/3 zooms.
          Besides AF is the work of the devil.
          Its better and more accurate if you learn to use MF more.
          Plus it saves on the wallet and frees up your choice of fantastic glass.

          • SteveD

            An excellent argument, but AF will rule the day deservedly or not.

          • You’re doubly wrong. In fact, there are no mirrorless lenses at all where there are fast-focusing, larger-aperture telephoto DSLR lenses, like a Zuiko Digital 50-200 f/2.8-3.5 SWD (not even starting to look at other DSLR systems), and even though there’s the E-P3, there’s still no proof that big, larger-aperture lenses will ever be able to focus as quickly with contrast AF as they have been doing for many years with Olympus, Canon, Nikon, Sony, Pentax DSLRs.

            And, come on, if you really don’t see why AF can be absolutely mandatory, then you should perhaps stay out of grown-up discussions on the subject.

  • Rutrem

    lenses,lenses,lenses is where the 43 system is better against APSc system
    when u compere prices:
    —–macro lenses————–
    Zuiko Digital 35mm 3.5 macro – 230eu
    Nikkor 55mm 2.8 micro(no autofocus, how great is that! :D) – 420eu
    Nikkor 60mm AF 2.8 micro – 510eu
    —–telephoto lenses———-
    Zuiko Digital 70-300mm 4-5.6 – 360eu
    Nikkor AF-s VR 70-300 3.5-5.6 – 555eu
    —–wideangle lenses———-
    Nikkor AF 18-35mm 3.5-4.5 – 600eu
    Zuiko Digital 9-18mm 4-5.6 – 500eu

    this is my math,going with 4/3 system i can save a lot of money and buy more frequently lenses and becouse of the small sensor type i can also use almost any MFlenses.

    • elflord

      You have a great selection of consumer zooms with micro 4/3. But I don’t see any fast primes or fast zooms in your list. How much is an f/2.8 zoom for micro 4/3 ? What about a fast prime ?

      Canon/Nikon do have consumer zooms at pretty decent prices. For example, the Canon 55-200 is just over $100 as is the standard Canon kit lens.

  • Toratda

    I would never use m43 for studio work!!!! Not good enough!!!!

    • Rutrem

      for a studio u can use any camera that have manual mode, hotshoe, a timer and a sensor with at least 10Mpix :)
      anything else can be set on the scene before shooting.

  • Rutrem

    this was a list of AF lenses i need, and i hope i will buy one day :)
    for now i have some MF M42 lenses :
    Helios 44-2 50mm 2.0-16 metal build – 15eu
    CZJ Sonnar 135mm 3.5-22 metal build – 45eu
    u have to get used to MF, is not fast shooting like with AF, but u can get great results.

    but if i have to choose between Canon and Nikon i will go with Nikon, no question, much better build quality and control over their products than Canon.

  • andy

    Heres a question
    WTF is many of you doing on a M4/3 rumour site if your anti M4/3?
    Beggers belief!

    • SteveD

      Some folks have both DSLRs and m43 and just think the m43 is not up to replacing DSLRs just yet. OTOH, they like the small size and weight. I’m somewhat in this group, although I think the m43 is very close now and will be the system of choice for me in a few years. Right now, the E-P1 still gets carried around more often then the K7.

    • Since when is this a Micro Four Thirds rumors site? When I last looked, it was still called 43rumors, not m43rumors, because it used to be dedicated to Four Thirds, which was only joined by Micro Four Thirds later, and as SteveD already said, some of the visitors here still use and need DSLRs and don’t give a hoot for PENs at this stage.

    • elflord

      There’s a lot of middle ground between “fan boy” and “anti”.

      I would put myself somewhere in that wide middle ground. I am following developments in micro 4/3 with considerable interest. I will probably get some kind of pocketable m43 camera once it stabilizes a little and the availability of fast lenses improves (it *is* improving but it has some way to go)

      But it’s just plain silly to suggest that micro 4/3 is going to obsolete DSLR any time soon.

  • Scott

    I am considering using the Ep-3 as my camera of choice for weddings. I love the size and the image quality is great for weddings. I am currently using the e5 but to be honest I am getting tired of having to carry that 35-100 around all day. I am slowly starting to use my primes more to get ready for the Ep3. I think it will change the way photographers shoot weddings. I cant wait.

    • Andyoz

      Thats interesting to know. It will be interesting to see a wedding photographer using a Pen camera and how that goes. The AF improvement means that capturing moments will be easier with the E-P3. Keep us posted when you try out an E-P3 for a wedding. Probably all the system needs now for that sort of photography is a high quality zoom. Hopefully there is one coming from either Oly or Panasonic.

      • Scott

        I think my shooting style will have to change. Right now I shoot about 95% of the wedding with my 35-100 and I love it. Its just so heavy. I have started shooting some with my 25 1.4 and 50 2.0. I know some photographers that leave their 50 1.2 on for the whole wedding. i am just not use to that look.

  • carpandean

    m43 is still a younger product line than the big dslr lines (Canon, Nikon, etc), so lenses are definitely a (temporary) limitation. Fast primes have been (20mm f/1.7) and are coming (PL 25mm f/1.4, MZ 45mm f/1.8) in the lineup. Some probably want super-fast (e.g., f/0.95) primes , so there is a hole there. Fast zooms are also still a hole that needs to be filled (unless you use some high $$ four thirds lenses.) I have no doubt that we’ll see them in the not-so-distant future, but until then, it will keep some away. I’d imagine, though, that many of those who want and would actually pay for the super-fast primes and the fast zooms aren’t buying sub-$1000 dslr’s either.

    The technological improvement of the m43 system are also coming at a much faster rate. My gf1, which isn’t even two years old, is grossly outperformed by the G3. The same could be said about the G1 and G2. The disadvantages of EVFs vs. OVFs are fading with each generation, while their advantages remain. The gap in performance due to the smaller sensor is also narrowing, as the line progresses. I have no doubts that one day mirrorless, in general, will replace true DSLRs. I also believe that m43 will always have a spot in the market due to the reduced system size afforded through the smaller lenses needed for its smaller sensor.

    Is it the right time to switch? That will depend a lot on your needs and how much you have into another system. The G3 truly represents a viable alternative for someone looking to buy, say, a Canon T3i. Additionally, many higher level photographers are starting to buy m43 as a second, more manageable system, when they don’t want to or can’t bring a bigger, heavier DSLRs systems. I imagine that this will also increase as we see higher end cameras (GH3, Pen Pro) come out.

    • elflord

      > I’d imagine, though, that many of those who want and would actually pay for the super-fast primes and the fast zooms aren’t buying sub-$1000 dslr’s either.

      Most budget APS-C buyers aren’t going to buy the pro model full frame lenses, but f/2.8 zooms from Sigma and Tamron, second tier primes (e.g. 50mm f/1.4, 85mm f/1.8, 35mm f/2) and certainly the “thrifty 50” (f1.8) are well within the budgets of these users.

      • carpandean

        True, true. The primes are covered pretty well now (not even counting adapted MF lenses or 4/3 lenses), but the fast zooms are not yet available (with AF, anyway.) There are numerous rumors that other companies (e.g., Sigma) will be making m43 lenses in the near future, so that may change soon. Still, most likely a temporary problem.

  • “Why buy a DSLR when you can have the G3?”

    Ummm because no stores actually have the G3 in stock

  • Anonymous

    AF might be fast for single shot, but the focus tracking is still not as good as a dslr especially if you are tracking action especially with EVF refresh rate. The comment need to be put into prospective. If you want a good IQ camera that you do not put into very demanding situation like action shooting or low light shooting with decent shutter speed. The M4/3 is a good option. But if you need to track a sporting event, the dslr is still the much better tool. And for the price the mid to high level entry dslr like a canon t2i is a better buy for low light or action needs.

  • Alan

    Admin, congratulations on an interesting site; I’ve regularly been visiting a few times a week for some time, and virtually daily leading up to the recent Olympus releases.

    As well as (mostly) reliable rumors, you have the regulation numbers of those who will “cavil on the ninth part of a hair”, “brand extremists”, “weirdos”, and even rational arguments – all very entertaining. A few malcontents stir things up nicely, although it would be even better without the occasional bad mouthing. As I’ve never owned a 43 camera, I wonder if you’d like a view from “outside”. Here goes:

    I’ve taken a close interest in micro 43 since the original announcement, it potentially offers a lot. Both brands seem to be making good efforts to widen the appeal of the format. However, apart from very significant focusing improvements, the new Olympus trio do seem to have been rather over-hyped. The new Olympus lenses have persuaded me to move into the format though. I now have an E-PL1 body and a Pany 20mm lens, and I’m looking out for the new 12 & 45mm primes to make up a small 3 lens kit. I will look at the new bodies when they arrive at dealers, but my feeling is that I will be waiting for the higher level body from either manufacturer.

    It is certainly true that the Sony NEX offers better IQ than m43, but it is largely theoretical in the absence of a range of lenses. Perhaps one day the NEX system will offer me that choice, but for now I’m happy to add m43 to my arsenal. Note “add m43” – I wouldn’t consider it as a replacement for an SLR/system. Even if I were starting out from scratch with just m43, I think I would add an SLR and a few lenses – far more versatile in most areas.

    So “why buy a DSLR when you can have the G3?” Surely that’s a troll question straight from the Hall of the Mountain King?

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.

What are Cookies?
A cookie is a small file of letters and numbers that is stored in a temporary location on your computer to allow our website to distinguish you from other users of the website. If you don't want to accept cookies, you'll still be able to browse the site and use it for research purposes. Most web browsers have cookies enabled, but at the bottom of this page you can see how to disable cookies. Please note that cookies can't harm your computer. We don't store personally identifiable information in the cookies, but we do use encrypted information gathered from them to help provide you with a good experience when you browse our website and also allow us to improve our site. You can watch a simple video from Google to find more information about cookies.

Cookies used by our Website
The 43rumors website, 43rumors.com, uses the following cookies for the collection of website usage statistics and to ensure that we can . These are anonymous and temporary. By using our website, you agree that we may place these types of cookies on your device.
Read how Google uses data when you use our partners' sites or apps: http://www.google.com/intl/en/policies/privacy/partners/
Google Analytics Cookie Usage on Websites: https://developers.google.com/analytics/devguides/collection/analyticsjs/cookie-usage?csw=1#cookiesSet Addthis cookies: http://www.addthis.com/privacy.
Disqus cookies: https://help.disqus.com/customer/portal/articles/466235-use-of-cookies.
Vimeo cookies: http://vimeo.com/privacy.
Youtube cookies: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/171780?hl=en-GB

Disabling/Enabling Cookies
You have the ability to accept or decline cookies by modifying the settings in your browser. Please note however that by deleting our cookies or disabling future cookies you may not be able to access certain areas or features of our site. For information about how to disable cookies in your browser please visit the About Cookies website.