Which is the best compact mirrorless camera? Thom Hogan gives you the answer…
Thom Hogan posted a new “Mirrorless Shootout“. He tested four compact mirrorless cameras, the Olympus E-PL1, Panasonic GF1, Samsung NX100 and the Sony NEX-5.
“The Panasonic and Samsung are the two serious photographer-friendly cameras in this bunch, while the Olympus has a little more compact gimmicky and the Sony is way over the top in changing the way you interact with a camera.”
Thom also explains why you shouldn’t wait for Canon, Pentax and Nikon to enter the mirrorless battle: “At the moment, neither Nikon nor Canon have chosen to play in the mirrorless arena. Nikon is likely to be the next entrant, and I expect to see their model hit the shelves by about March 2011. Ditto Pentax. No word on Canon. Frankly, I think waiting for a maker to enter this market is probably a waste of time. Why? One word: lenses.”
Conclusion? “I can wholeheartedly recommend the Panasonic GF-1″ and there is a surprise: “I can’t really recommend the Sony NEX-5 directly“.
Read the full review at http://www.bythom.com/compactmirrorless.htm
Via Thom Hogan
Share
Recent comments
Comment from Ulli: ok, i can see the need for a landscaper ...
Comment from Thom Hogan: A landscape shooter trying to go tripodl...- Comment from Thom Hogan: Mostly price and what the camera compani...
Comment from Reza: So how come you didn't choose E-P2 inste...
Li Sun
2 years ago |I prefer E-P2 though.
Chris K.
2 years ago |Amen, I have both the E-PL1 (my first m43 camera) and E-P2 and I mostly shoot with the E-P2. Keep thinking about getting a GF1 with the Pana pancake (yeah I haven’t gotten that pancake yet…)
Henrik
2 years ago |I saw this link on the dpreview forum aswell. Someone in that thread said that he had tested the EP-1 against the GF-1 and that he thought the EP-1 was better. He did this test last year. I dont know if its true or not. I got it from the forum discussion so I dont have any other source than that.
Thom Hogan
2 years ago |Yes. My original reviews were about a year ago and involved the E-P1 and GF-1. In practice, it’s a very close call between the E-P1 or E-P2 and the GF-1, and it usually boils down to a single feature, like sensor-based stabilization or use of manual focus lenses. For me, the E-P2 became my main small camera for quite some time, though I’ve continued to use the GF-1 as well.
The E-PL1 unfortunately tends to highlight the things that I don’t like about the Olympus design, so drops below the GF-1 in my book. Not by much, but enough to make the call.
Reza
2 years ago |So how come you didn’t choose E-P2 instead of E-PL1 for the comparison? Interestingly your current top picture on your website is shot with an E-P2…
Thom Hogan
2 years ago |Mostly price and what the camera companies are pushing right now. Since I already have an E-P1 review on the site, I don’t see much sense in repeating things already written.
I probably should have put a bigger note in the review though. Overall, I tend towards using the E-P2 over the GF-1 over the E-PL1.
Agent00soul
2 years ago |Hmm.. he says the 4/3 sensor is “about half the area of the old 35mm frame”. This is not correct. It’s more correct for APSc sensors. The 4/3 sensor is about half the linear size, which means a quarter of the area.
david
2 years ago |If you want to be precise, then APS-C is ~35-45% of the area, depending on whose APS-C you’re talking about.
Thom Hogan
2 years ago |Good catch. I’ll fix that.
frosti7
2 years ago |Very detailed and throughout review, well done!
Ulli
2 years ago |for me, to classify which cam to be the best, is a subjective aimed task. but from objective point of view; shouldn’t “the best” mirrorless have built in stabilisation?
Thom Hogan
2 years ago |Depends upon how you shoot and what lenses you’re going to be using. If you’re on a tripod all the time, who cares? If you’re a Panny user using the very good 45-200mm as your telephoto, you’ve got IS.
I didn’t point it out in this article, but the Oly IS has a weak spot in the just under 1/100 shutter speed range. A number of us have seen worse results on occasion with IS turned on and a shutter speed of say, 1/80.
Ulli
2 years ago |using a m43 body on a tripod all the time sounds like a contradiction to me
i have read about the is issue. stil i think its better to have is in body, rather then in a few lenses.
Thom Hogan
2 years ago |A landscape shooter trying to go tripodless is just asking for trouble. I’ve got some quite impression landscape shots from m4/3, but they’re all supported. So why would someone do that? Well, carrying a smaller tripod and lighter camera/lens on an 18 mile hike (yes, I do that) is a lot easier than carrying a bigger tripod and a heavier camera and lens.
I haven’t written much about the different takes on IS, but there are some differences between lens-based and sensor-based IS. They show up mostly as you go to longer lenses, but they are differences you ignore at your own risk. That said, I think it’s clear that I prefer sensor-based stabilization for these types of cameras.
Ulli
2 years ago |ok, i can see the need for a landscaper now, i have to admit i never thought m43 to be taken seriously for that kind of subject.
Robert
2 years ago |I recently picked up a E-PL1 on sale in Canada for $430 (with the kit lens). Curiosity got the better of me at that price. Turns out I love the camera and it’s made me rethink my plans about buying a Nikon D7000, mainly because it suits the way my shooting style has evolved better than a DSLR.
I shoot primarily b&w with a Leica M6, and I can easily slip the E-PL1 into my camera bag to use as a colour camera. Since I’m used to pre-focusing/zone focusing, the slower AF on the E-PL1 doesn’t bother me as it might others. The menu system is awful, but if you work off the super control panel it’s quite manageable, and the level of control over parameters (sharpness, noise-reduction, exposure compensation for individual metering modes, etc.) on the camera is very impressive. I haven’t had quite the same trouble with inadvertently hitting buttons as Thom has. Most important to me is the quality of the OOC jpeg. I find the jpegs distinctive and pleasing enough that I can “commit” to them in the same way I would commit to a particular film stock. The more I shoot, the more the process becomes to me about commitment at the moment the image is captured, and less about post-production.
Mid-range and higher DSLRs run circles around m4/3 camera on paper – BUT how many of these features are essential to an individual’s shooting style/genre, particularly if one is not a working pro? I can work with a lower max-ISO and compensate for exposure latitude, but I can’t make a D7000 fit into my courier bag or the pocket in my winter coat. Perhaps this thinking comes from shooting rangefinders, where compromise is inherent. But for me, “compromise” has led to a distillation of what is important to me about my image-making and the tools I use to achieve it, along with a greater sense of commitment to the pictures I choose to make. In this respect, the E-PL1 fits nicely into my working method.
Anyway, great review as always Thom.
Nate
2 years ago |Tom… Is was actually your review a year ago that inspired me to drop all my Nikon stuff and make a switch to micro four thirds. And I don’t regret that decision a year later. In fact I love my current set-up. Although, I have to say I prefer the Panasonic G1 compared to my GF1. However, I dropped my GF1 two stories and it landed on the ground and survived the fall. This convinced me that the Panasonics are very sturdy, well-built cameras and lenses. I hope the M43 format grows. I’m very happy with it! Now Leica needs to quit being elitist and help out in the M43 market because I think they could do a lot!
Nate
MikeS
2 years ago |Big fan of Thom’s site.
The lack of a dial on the E-PL1 and lack of onboard flash on the E-P1/2 pushed me towards the GF1, which also had superior autofocus and came with the excellent 20mm f/1.7. However, since I use manual lenses a lot, it’d be great to have in-body IS for the occasional handheld in less-than-great light, though I doubt Panny will ever deliver.
Agree completely about NEX. What good is top image quality in a compact if the lenses dwarf the body and the interface is muddled? I also question Sony’s commitment to releasing a decent number of lenses for the system that are photographer- (rather than videographer-) oriented.
If the Samsung took m4/3 lenses (or had a more decent lens selection, as Thom points out), I’d have gotten one in a heartbeat.