Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 Review Discussion

[David Rasnake]

For months, we've talked about it. We've carefully studied Panasonic's press materials, theorized about its performance, and even sampled pre-production units on not one but two occasions. After all of this, the moment of truth is here: our Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 review unit rolled into the office a few weeks back and has been subjected to as much menu browsing, studio testing, and real-world shooting as our time with the camera would allow. Would the actual final version of this interchangeable-lens camera that is, to be picky, not actually an SLR at all warrant all the buzz it's generated?

Read the full content of this Article: Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 Review

[Caleb Murdock]

Thank you for the great review.

I've seen a lot of photos from this camera now, and the JPGs are a little too soft for my satisfaction. They don't, in my experience, sharpen well. I'm curious if turning down the noise-reduction resulted in sharper images. Also, how much trouble is the RAW-processing software, SilkyPix? To get the results I want, I may have to shoot everything in RAW.

Thanks.

[David Rasnake]

Also, how much trouble is the RAW-processing software, SilkyPix? To get the results I want, I may have to shoot everything in RAW.

It's not the best software I've ever used, but certainly not terrible either. It gives you most of the range of adjustments you'll get from ACR or other converters; the interface just isn't quite as polished.

I'd have to think that we'll get an Adobe converter for the G1 within the next few months as well.

dr

[f4ding]

From the resolution to sensor size ratio, I would expect the camera to at least have as sharp an image as DSLRs at low ISO. That doesn't seem to be the case (or am I reading the review wrong?). If it is, do you think the problem is with the camera, or a better lens might fix the problem?

[David Rasnake]

No, I would say the shots at low ISOs are on par with other Four Thirds cameras. My apologies if that isn't clear in the review (it was a late night getting the text of this finished ).

dr

[Caleb Murdock]

From the resolution to sensor size ratio, I would expect the camera to at least have as sharp an image as DSLRs at low ISO. That doesn't seem to be the case (or am I reading the review wrong?). If it is, do you think the problem is with the camera, or a better lens might fix the problem?

I'm not happy with the sharpness either. Over on Imaging Resource, approximately two-fifths of the way down on the page below, they show how much sharper the RAW files can be, although they really laid the sharpening on, possibly a little too much (I'm talking about the mouse-over picture of the house gable). I think that this camera processes the JPG images too much.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PROD...CG1IMAGING.HTM

Look at the increased detail in the roof shingles at the lower right. Imaging Resource used a large poster for that photo, and some of the blurriness of the pine needles is probably in the poster itself.