THE PANASONIC GF1 REAL WORLD REVIEW

PAGE 1 - Intro and why I think M4/3 is here to stay.

PAGE 2 - The GF1 specs and features?

PAGE 3 - Compared to the Leica D-Lux 4 and Leica M9?

PAGE 4 - High ISO Sample and Crops.

PAGE 5 - My favorite shots with the GF1 & KIT Zoom.

PAGE 6 - The one lens you MUST buy with this camera. The 20 1.7.

PAGE 7 - My bottom line conclusion.

PAGE 8 - Just for fun! The GF1 and M9 side by side.

PAGE 8 - Just for fun - GF1 and M9 side by side.    

This is a page “just for fun”. If you are a purist, or someone who is into technical testing, then skip this page as it does not include any kind of “real” tests and is not meant to be a test at all. If you are offended by seeing similar shots posted side-by-side from a $7000 camera and a $700 camera, then leave now and do not read further! See, anytime I do something like this, I get feedback. Some good, some bad. Still, I think its something fun and interesting to do.

As I stated in this review, when I shot the GF1, I usually shot the M9 with it because I wanted to see how much better the M9 files were, and yes, they are vastly sharper and more detailed. No question (see my M9 review here). The M9 is a full frame 18MP $7000 camera. The GF1 has a 4/3 sensor, much smaller than the M9 sensor. I knew they were not comparable, as the M9 would wipe the floor with the GF1 when it came to detail, tonality, and resolution. BUT!!!! There is always a but!

When I was going through the images to include in this review, I was surprised  to see just how good the GF1 files were, and I was using the somewhat badly reviewed Kit Zoom! In some of the shots, I preferred the GF1 rendering, color, and tonality, while other shots I preferred the M9. While the 100% views of the files were not the same, prints at 8X10 or under would most likely see no difference in detail.

So, I decided to put some of these shots here just for kicks. It is not a technical comparison in any way, shape, or form. It is just my real results with each camera as I shot it. You can see the M9 superiority here, even in the resized JPEGS but I ask myself, is it really worth the $10k for an M9 and 35 Cron compared to the $799 GF1 and kit zoom? The answer to that is NO, unless you are filthy rich and money does not matter, or, as I stated earler, are crazy like I am.

Again, I own the M9 and it does produce BEAUTIFUL files (and I am nowhere near filthy rich), but this GF1 is a camera that has really impressed me for its size, functionality, speed, and quality. Also, you can shoot Leica M lenses on the GF1 with the adapter, but a 35 will become a 70 since the GF1 has a 2X crop.

Enough babbling, here are some shots...

First up, some fall color. This shot was with the GF1 and I think I used one of the creative color filters to get the colors subdued. I love the soft tones and light. Shot at F5.6.

The M9 version was shot at the same time, on the same ground, but with a different leaf. This was shot at F2 with a 50 Summilux and the original shows some great detail. For color and tone, I prefer the GF1 version. YMMV.

OK, these next shots were processed exactly the same way. I used a filter in Color Efex to bring out the fall color. The GF1 was shot with a different focal length.

These next two shots were also enhanced with some color and vignetting. The M9 shot here seems more dramatic due to the wider FL and more vignetting, but the GF1 shot is sharp and also has some dramatic effect.

I do prefer the shot I took with the M9 here. More spooky and moody IMO.

I added vignetting here to draw your eyes to the subject.

One more, “just for fun” ( remember that!). This is not in any way a scientific test, just showing my shots with each camera taken at the same time. I know potential GF1 users will find this interesting. It’s just that for $700, this may be the best deal in the digital camera world right now.

I shot this old barn with the GF1, M9, and D-Lux 4 one after another. While processing these, I had a hard time getting the sky to come out in the GF1 and D-Lux 4 versions. This is due to the Dynamic Range. The M9 has more DR than the smaller sensor cameras and this shot shows it. When viewing these side-by-side, I clearly see an M9 advantage, even at this low resolution. Still, the GF1 did great.

Here you can see the M9 shots looks smoother, richer, and not as hard. The skies are deeper and not blown out. This was shot with the $4000 35 Summilux lens.

Just wanted to say that I did not provide full size samples here or crops. I was not trying to prove anything, except that the color and tonality of the GF1 is excellent. The full size images would show the M9 wins every time for detail, resolution, and sharpness. But, this is how it should be. I put these side-by-side shots up to show potential GF1 buyers just how good the GF1 is for the money.

If you do not have an extra $7,000 laying around, or have no interest in the Leica M9, my #1 recommendation if you want a smaller size camera with great quality AND the ability to shoot Leica lenses with it...man...BUY THE GF1!! It’s terrific and it has the capability to take even better quality images than the D-Lux 4. Add the 20 1.7 and you will have an amazing small and light combo that can bring you some of that fast glass magic for a total of $1100 or so.