New Panasonic GX1 image samples (and preorders at Jessops and Digitalrev)


The video on top shows the extremely fast new GX1 autofocus.

And Panasonic Japan posted a set of new image samples (Click here). And Trustedreview (Click here) performed a new ISO test: “The GX1 is able to match the more than impressive results obtained with the G3 earlier in the year. Shooting a couple of subjects outdoors in fading light and also indoors under dim artificial lights, we found the GX1 delivered excellent, virtually noise-free results up to ISO 800 with ISO 1600. Above this, ISO 3200 is actually still quite useable, despite noise becoming more noticeable“.

More GX1 news I didn’t post yesterday at Dpnow, The OnlinePhotographer and Letsgodigital. Popco posted a couple of GX1 videos on vimeo: X lens test, 20fps test, level gauge, FN control, touch&shooting.

Preorder ar now available on Digitalrev and Jessops too. That is the new preorder link list:
Black GX1 body at Amazon (Click here) and Digitalrev (Click here).
Silver GX1 body at Amazon (Click here).
Black GX1 with 14-42mm X lens at Amazon (Click here) and Digitalrev (Click here).
Silver GX1 with 14-42mm X lens at Amazon (Click here).
Black GX1 with 14-42mm at Amazon (Click here)
Silver GX1 with 14-42mm at Amazon (Click here) and Jessops (Click here).


  • Barry

    After the fault with the 45-175 X, and the possible fault with the 14-42 X at the long end, I will stay well clear of the new X camera until it’s been fully tested by reputable reviewers!

    • wonderer

      can you elaborate the fact hte engeneers in pana oversight or you are just trolling?

    • twoomy

      Barry–What fault are you talking about? Link? Sources?

      • Mr. Reeee

        Check out the DPReview M4/3 Forums. there are several threads about weird focus problems with both lenses. It’s hard to tell whether people are overreacting, it’s operator error or there are real problems.

        It does seem like there’s a problem of some sort, though.

        • Petty

          Mr Reeee, I’m putting you down as a troll. Yesterday on Panys big product announcement you posted a link to prices for NEX camera & today this!! If I did that on sonyrumors they’d be all over me. You have been unveiled!

          • infared

            Hey guys/gals…I have the new 45-175mm lens. Love it. I just checked some shots (which were all shot with IS “on”), and they were tack sharp but shot at 1/500 or above. I will see if I can get out there before the end of the day and shoot some photos in the 1/100-1/300 shutter speed range (which is the shutter speed range that the blogs are saying the IS problem is with this lens), I will shoot the photos with IS on and IS off and see if the problem exists in my lens. I am extremely I should be good at doing a real-life controlled comparison. I will try to get back to you in this forum later this afternoon or this evening with results. That would be on a GF1. I do not have anything newer.
            (….but maybe a GX1 is in my future, we will have to see what Kai has to say about it! :-))

            • Joe

              Why would you use IS at 1/500s? I would be surprised if you can get a tack sharp image at such shutter speed.

              • infared

                Joe…it is too complicated for me to type a photo class here. Trust me. If I have IS on mode 1 and have the above lens set to 175mm and am shooting a stationary object the shots should be sharp from 1/4000 down to about 1/100 (this where it should start to get blurry..but there is no exact shutter speed that I can say is is an inexact area of science). The low end (ie slower shutter speeds) is where the IS starts doing its work of correction but it will not ruin shot set at the higher end. At least it shouldnt. Do I need to have it on if I am shooting at 1/1000, No, but it is ok to have the IS on even though it is not needed. At least that is the way that the IS is designed.
                And..Joe…remember..I am taking my time to try to be helpful here…so please keep that in mind.

                • Joe

                  I am not trying to attack you or anything. And you don’t need to be condescending. IS is a mechanism to compensate for the camera shake due to vibration or the movement of the camera (definitely not to compensate for the motion of the object). Thus, it is well known that by using IS at higher shutter speed, this mechanism will actually degrade the IQ. It is true for in camera IS as well as in lens IS. The mechanism is trying to compensate for something that is not there (in case of tripod use and MLU), or not perceptible enough (high shutter speed). I am no longer a pro wedding photog, but my photography fundamental is still with me. And I have shot with both IBIS and in-lens IS long enough to understand when to turn it on.

                  • Hmmm…I understand what you are saying, it kind of makes sense…. I used to be a commercial days (no IS really)…I am a pretty avid reader and have a pretty broad knowledge about photography…but you never know it all (kind of one of the cool things about it). I am curious as to where this info came from about turning the IS off at higher shutter speeds. Everything I have read…( I have a $3000 Canon lens with IS…..nowhere in the instructions does it tell me to turn the IS off at high shutter speeds…camera on tripod..yes turn it off..but not high shutter speed shooting stationary subject matter…I will check the instructions again). Also my images shot with the Panasonic 45-175mm lens at 1/500sec at 175mm were as sharp as my tests with the lens on the tripod and the IS turned off. This is the first time I have heard this info. Again…my understanding is that these lenses are DESIGNED to shoot handheld at any shutter speed in the range of 2 stops under what you could normally shoot with no IS right up to any fast shutter speed. Wouldn’t the manufacturer tell me in the instructions to “turn the IS off for shutter speeds above 1/1000 sec” or something like that??? I have never read anything like that.

                    • Joe

                      Thom Hogan mentioned about IS and high shutter speed in this article:

                      Nonetheless, I did not realize that you shot 1/500 at 175mm (and not 45mm). In this case, I think the IS might help, though I rarely shoot at this focal length. I know from my FF DSLR experience, especially with WA, I can see noticeable drop in acuity with IS on at high shutter speed. Even when I shot at 135mm and 1/500, IS would not be advisable. For tripod use though, IS is always a no no.

                    • Joe..if you scroll down below here to my last comment to disco….I did some research and found out a lot more…I also sent an email to Panasonic and they want me to call them..which I plan to do tomorrow. I sure did learn a LOT taking this the extra mile…thanks for pushin my buttons!!!!!!! :LOL!

            • I, too, own the 45-175 x lens. There does indeed seem to be a focusing issue under certain circumstances, generally at the long end. It seems like the lens simply gives up and doesn’t try to focus anymore until I change scenes or focal lengths. I usually just pass it off as c’est la vie, but if I were shooting sports for a company this lens wouldn’t cut it.

              • hmmmm….I have not experienced any repeating problem with the focus…but this IS thing has me going. LOL!

          • Fish

            Haha excellent choice of username Petty.

            Anyone who has been on this site for any amount of time knows that Reeee is not a troll. Did you even read his comment before you replied to it?? It strikes me as very fair and open minded – a couple people asked Barry what he was talking about and Reeee directed them to the source. Now he, and everyone else, is free to make his own decisions.

            I frankly couldn’t care less what they do at sonyrumors – and I’m not sure why you think it would be relevant here. If you feel more comfortable at a site where people bury their heads in the sand in response to possible problems, or don’t help out fellow members, you are free to go there. Undoubtedly that’s where you also picked up this unbecoming habit of name calling.

          • Mr. Reeee

            Ha Hah! Troll? That’s constructive.
            What should I put you down as?

            Y’know, I love my GH2 and am an ardent supporter and proponent of the Micro Four Thirds system. As a user with a sizable investment M4/3 gear (and a designer, professionally) I get irked when Panasonic and Olympus take stupid shortcuts or make bad design decisions. Like weirdly distributed features, incrementalism or labeling dated tech as new and wonderful features (12MP sensors, low-res LCDs and EVFs, etc.) in the face of some very real competition. I want BOTH P&O to offer the best gear possible, with great feature sets, at good prices and to sell to as many people as possible.

            I also like the Sony NEX-5N. A lot. I’ve handled it and the NEX-7. Both are excellent cameras, with their own list of good features and oddities. I like the Olympus EPL3, too. Actually, I like cameras in general and currently own cameras and/or lenses from Panasonic, Olympus, Canon, Nikon, Pentax and Voigtländer.

            As for the lens “problem”, I’m was passing along some info about lens rumors Barry mentioned and I had happened to read about. In situations like this with new gear, I always assume operator error when someone starts bitching about it not working correctly.
            It’s the RTFM-Factor. ;-)

            • infared

              ANYWAY …if anyone is interested..I did a test with my 45-175mm. I didn’t have 3 days to do this but here is what I did. I set up my camera about 25ft. away from a stationary, well-defined object. I set the lens to 175mm (as this is the focal length the blogs are saying is the problem, max FL for the lens). I shot a set of photos hand-held, IS on Mode 1 from 1/100, 1/125,1/160, 1/200, 1/250, 1/320 sec. shutter speed.(again this is the area of reported problem and where I think the IS should be kicking in to make a sharp photo where I would not normally get one handheld). I did the same exact shots with the IS off and used a tripod…I just wanted to make sure I was getting sharp exposures. (Again, this is a REALLY hard thing to test as we do not have a set shutter speed that the lens SHOULD be sharp at for a given focal length, shutter speed, and subject distance in mode one…there just isn’t a control number. Its an inexact science.)
              My results of the handheld shots would lead me to believe that there is a problem with the IS on this lens, as starting at 1/320 sec I am getting a non sharp image. Not exactly blurred but a double image ghost (like it is some kind of IS issue). It gets worse and worse as I get to 1/100 sec. I would expect this IS (Power OIS) on this lens to give me a sharp photo at 1/320 sec at 175mm even if I was only 25ft away from my subject. (my control shots with the tripod were as razor sharp as this lens is capable of). Does anyone have any thoughts on the subject??? ie. what shutter speed should we expect the IS to keep the image sharp at?

              • infared

                I know the rule of thumb with no IS with a 35mm camera to keep a photo sharp you shoot a shutter speed at twice the focal length of the lens. So, in 35mm world if I have a 175mm lens I need 1/350 sec to not have blur. (generalization).
                If image stabilization is working I should be able to have hand-held sharp images “about” 2 stops below that shutter speed. So shouldn’t the images be sharp to about 1/200sec? with the IS turned on???

                • sparedog

                  +1 with this, a photo should be sharp at shutter speed twice the focal length.

                  i think would apply to m43 as well as ff.

                • disco

                  IIRC the SS rule of thumb is 1 to1.5x the reciprocal of the FL in 35mm equivalent, so that includes the crop factor. 175mm on m4/3 should be shot at least at 1/500.

                  • Disco…I feel like you are talking a foreign language! LOL!…can you explain the math a little more so that I can understand it. Thanks for your help.
                    I would think that we would use the “actual” focal length of the lens..not convert it to 35mm. 35mm is an arbitrary reference with all cameras because most people are aware of that format and how the perspective is portrayed in that format. Again, it is only for point of reference, isn’t it? I am getting more and more confused with this.

                    • Disco…I researched more…and although I do not understand the science…. the MFT focal length must be converted to 35mm equivalent and then the reciprocal of that focal length would be a starting place for where we would see sharp hand-held images with this lens (with no IS). Just as you have stated. So that shutter speed would be minimum 1/350…but most people believe 1.5x or 2x that reciprocal.
                      ie. 1/500 to 1/700 is a better bet.
                      So..even if we take the extremely safe shutter speed of 1/700 for unblurred images with no IS…..Should not the new Power O.I.S. from Panasonic give me a sharp photo @ 1/320 sec with the lens zoomed to 175mm? I am not getting sharp photo at that shutter speed, consistently.

             Joe above…all of my research says that Optical Image Stabilization should NOT effect sharpness negatively when shooting at high shutter speeds, say 1/1000-1/4000sec. In fact the O.I.S. can actually improve your sharpness average even there, according to a number of sources on the web.

                    • Joe

                      I definitely would like to see some of your sources on the shutter speed matter. Admittedly, I have quite limited experience with OIS. But I know for sure this is the case for IBIS, since I have seen it many times.

                      As for the shutter speed, indeed the minimum without IS is 1/FL (have to be in 35mm equivalent to account for the true FOV). Of course, it would vary depending on the ability to hold the camera steady (thus the 1.5 and 2x factor). Same would apply for OIS.

            • Petty

              You can call me what you want Mr Reee. I stand by what I said. You post a link to pricing on a NEX on the thread announcing their new camera – not very constructive. Also anybody can check your posts for the last 2 weeks. You’re very subtle, but you are trolling.

              • LIving up to your name I see.

              • Cansalt

                Petty, It is you that is Trolling. Please go away

        • MP Burke

          My view is that they are over-reacting to some bad results obtained by a few people. I have the 45-175mm lens and would have to agree that there seems to be a problem with the O.I.S and results can be inconsistent at the 175mm end. Panasonic have been informed about this and it will be interesting to see if they can come up with a firmware update to alter this behaviour.
          In good light results from the lens are generally good (at a guess I would place it in the same realm as the old 14-42mm kit lens) and I have already been using it to get some images of dragonflies from 5-6 feet away. I will begin posting some examples on my DPReview gallery.

      • Jesper

        Yes, there were several posts regarding the new Power O.I.S., saying that this new OIS actually brings down the overall sharpness IQ.

        • Barry

          Yes. Read up on it on the Internet before you call me a troll.
          I have the 45-175 and it’s OIS is shit. The samples of the 14-42 x at 42 are horrid!!!

  • Mr. Reeee

    I can’t wait to hear Kai’s take on the GX1 from DigitalRev. ;-)

    • Me too :D
      Kai. What a guy.

    • zstsc

      +1 go Kai!

    • MikeS

      Yes, Kai. Give us *something* to smile about re this GX1 launch!

    • infared

      +1 I hope he uses a bokeh-licious lens when he does his testing! :-)

      • Otaku

        But he’ll be disappointed since the GX1 has no tilty-swively-screen! :(

    • Boring camera warrants a boring review – regardless of the reviewer.

      But, OK, for few more glimpses of Alamby, I will persist through the review.

      • jack

        +100 on Alamby, she’s downright charming.

  • andy

    £729 with the so so original 14-42 lens (on jessops)…are you insane panny?!

  • safaridon

    With every new product or model introduced by certain manufactures there seems to be a flurry of user reports rushing to be first posting to claim what is wrong and what they don’t like. The problem is I don’t see signs of same observations by the many reviews or tests so I would take these initial comments of problems with a grain of salt until better verified. On the other hand maybe the reviews trying to be complimentary are overlooking problems as in the past as they have done with the IBIS issues ignoring that a problem exists? Yes the Xlens are a new novel design maybe rushed into production with some bugs but given the scientific lens data and special lens elements suggesting otherwise I would take these comments of lower IQ as suspect as most reviews say at least equal to the best equivalent lens. One could also suggest quality control but I think Pany is producing these Xlenses only in Japan where specs and quality control reportedly higher.

    • Esa Tuunanen

      Majority of the so called “reviews” of everything in all medias are just repeating of advertising lines.

      And for the quality of “high quality” m4/3 lenses there are very few which are optically actually good and not made with software cover ups of optical flaws:
      Geometry distortion of most zooms (and Oly 12mm) starting from wide angle would make even Sigma and Tamron blush to neon red out of sheer shame, some have plain incredible amount of vignetting… and sharpness outside center in general drops lot more than in 4/3 lenses.
      Just read Photozone’s reviews thoroughly and you’ll find out that real situation of optical performance is lot less rosy than that drawn by marketroids.

  • MikeS

    “The GX1 is able to match the more than impressive results obtained with the G3 earlier in the year.”

    Amazing, especially when considering the fact that they have THE SAME SENSOR.

    • +1000

    • twoomy

      Ha ha! I laughed at that too. I mean really, WTF!!! It’s the same sensor in a different box; if image quality didn’t match, they’re f*cking incompetent.

  • Berneck

    The more I read, the more I’m glad I saved my money and went with the G3.

  • MP Burke

    The price listed at Jessops in UK (£729) does seem rather high and I think it will be reduced soon. Panasonic always seems to price cameras rather high when they are initially released in the UK, though usually there is a sweetener (e.g. extended guarantee, cashback, or software pack). One side-effect of this policy is that magazines quote the high, initial price in their reviews, even though the price usually drops in a few months.

    • andy

      Thats true but this is a kit without even the X lens.
      You can pick up a G3 with the same kitlens for under £480…when it was first out it was no more than £625.
      You can buy a GH2 with the 14-42 for less than the GX1…I recall even that was around £750 mark originally…either Jessops have it wrong or Panasonic has truly gone OTT.

  • Sure does focus fast though. Gotta give it that.

  • gary

    Amazon list it as £602 with the old 14-42 standard lens, quite a big difference from jessops £729?!?

  • Neicila

    I can hear on this video we still have this terrible and intrusive shutter noise. In 3 years (from G1 to this GX1), why Pana was unable to improve this ?

  • ihateidiots

    Would people really stuff it on the IBIS? Let’s recap this in bold


    Ok. Stay there. Look at this. And quit the fucking whining.

    • Mr. Reeee


      No kidding. IBIS is not some magic formula, a panacea or a replacement for basic camera handling technique. It’s a consumer-level feature for point and shoot cameras held up it the air with arms extended. For that, it makes sense.

      Panasonic, just like Nikon and Canon, uses In-Lens stabilization, fine tuned to the specific lens. In that situation, it’s supposedly more effective.

      Honestly, how did anyone manage to take photos handheld without stabilization? Is it even possible? ;-)

      • Mar

        IBIS is great because it doesn’t require you to buy IS in eeach lens, and lens has less things which can break and affect image quality.

        • twoomy

          And on the flip side by your logic, IBIS can break and affect image quality for ALL of your lenses!

          But in reality, I do buy the argument that in-lens stabilization is better because it can be fine-tuned to type of lens. As far as lenses having extra things that can break, I have a dozen Nikon lenses and four Pany lenses and I’m a bit rough on them, but I haven’t had any lens IS break. If you have any stats to back up your fear of IS in lenses, I’d love to see it.

    • I compared my Olympus E-P1 and GH2 using the same 14-140 Pany and the ois in the lens is much more effective and useful. Obviously, using an old manual Nikon lens on both cameras should favor the Olympus lens but I just can’t see it. Like, Mr. Reese says… with the GH2 pressed against my face it is just as steady as holding the P&S e-P1…. at least that’s my experience.

      • Ben Y


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,, 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:
Google Analytics Cookie Usage on Websites: Addthis cookies:
Disqus cookies:
Vimeo cookies:
Youtube cookies:

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.