Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Rhode Island
    Posts
    13

    Panasonic G1 photos

    I'm very disappointed by the Panasonic G1 photos that Jeff just posted. I don't find them sharp at all. I loaded one into my photo-editing program, and it didn't sharpen well. At the same time that they look soft, they also look over-processed, as if too much contrast has been added. I'm very discouraged. I was hoping the photo quality would be good.

    None of those photos were converted from RAW, were they? Maybe the RAW photos will look better.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Tallinn, Estonia
    Posts
    225
    Yeah, I noticed it too that they are not very sharp. But if you check the EXIF data of the sample pictures then you can see that the pics have been taken at the default settings:
    Contrast: 0
    Saturation: 0
    Sharpness: 0

    Otherwise I was very pleased with the image quality produced by the camera and the lens.

    Contrast added? Didn't notice that in any of the pics. On the contrary, I was impressed how well the camera can handle direct sunlight, there are details visible both in the lighted areas and in shadow areas. Very good!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    So Calif
    Posts
    3,226
    Could this be why?

    "Panasonic has requested that any photos posted from this camera be 640 x 480 or lower, which I don't think are terribly useful. Thus, I'll save those for when a production model arrives."

    It looks like they have been removed.
    Last edited by SpecialK; 10-24-2008 at 07:09 AM.
    Pentax K20D/K5/15/21/40/70/10-17/12-24, Sigma 17-70 2.8-4.5/150-500, Tamron 90 Macro/70-200 2.8, Canon SX20 IS/Elph 500HS
    (formerly Pentax 50 1.4/50-200/55-300/K100D, Sigma 18-50 2.8/70-300 APO, Tamron 28-75, Viv 800, Tele-Tokina 800, Canon S3 IS, Samsung L210)
    http://s133.photobucket.com/albums/q78/KylePix/

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Bellevue, WA
    Posts
    1,206
    Quote Originally Posted by SpecialK View Post
    Could this be why?

    "Panasonic has requested that any photos posted from this camera be 640 x 480 or lower, which I don't think are terribly useful. Thus, I'll save those for when a production model arrives."

    It looks like they have been removed.
    Follow the link from the home page, not the preview...
    Jeff Keller
    Founder/Editor, Digital Camera Resource Page

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    So Calif
    Posts
    3,226
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Keller View Post
    Follow the link from the home page, not the preview...

    Ah, thanks. I thought I was missing something...
    Pentax K20D/K5/15/21/40/70/10-17/12-24, Sigma 17-70 2.8-4.5/150-500, Tamron 90 Macro/70-200 2.8, Canon SX20 IS/Elph 500HS
    (formerly Pentax 50 1.4/50-200/55-300/K100D, Sigma 18-50 2.8/70-300 APO, Tamron 28-75, Viv 800, Tele-Tokina 800, Canon S3 IS, Samsung L210)
    http://s133.photobucket.com/albums/q78/KylePix/

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Rhode Island
    Posts
    13
    Perhaps contrast isn't what I'm seeing. All I know is that there is a muddy quality to the photos, and it isn't just softness. If it were just softness, the photos could be sharpened, but they don't sharpen well.

    I've been looking to move up to a DSLR-quality camera for two years now, but I want it to be relatively small, and I want useful live view. The Olympus E-510 was disappointing because of its lack of a power adapter (I do a lot of product photography). The Sigma DP1 doesn't do macro well, and it had a host of other problems. And now the Panasonic G1 has terrible image quality. I'm never going to find a camera that suits me!

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Lakewood, WA
    Posts
    9
    @Caleb,

    I use a Oly 510 for product work, usually with the 14-54 f2.8-3.5 or the 50 f2 lenses and have had excellent feedback from my clients. My work doesn't appear above letter size on ads so 10 mpx is sufficient. I always shoot in RAW so color, white balance, etc is adjustable, but I find what comes out of the camera usually works well with possibly a small white balance adjustment and some USM. Jeff's review of the G1 looks very promising image quality wise and I was hoping that the G1 would be priced a little lower so I could use it for my carry-around camera and trade my 510 for an E3. With the adaptor i could use my Zuiko 70-300 f4-5.6 to reach out instead of buying the 70-200, especially as it focuses so slow on my 510 I always manually focus anyway.

    Also, I've sold some Oly 510 photos enlarged to 15" x 20" and they work well even at that size. I don't know what you mean by muddy image quality but to me the Oly color, and when I had one, the Panasonic FZ-50 color was excellent. Have you profiled your monitor?

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    45
    I'm also disappointed, especially when compared with the Nikon D90 with the same size sensor. The review had a heavily pp'ed RAW iso1600 shot from the G1, and it looked pretty good. Panasonic should ditch that Venus whatever and start over. The G1's jpegs didn't look that much better than the TZ5's.

    maybe Olympus will have better luck with their micro 4/3. Would be interesting when Canon & Nikon hop on.
    Fuji F31fd circa March 2007
    Fuji S100fs September 2008

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Lakewood, WA
    Posts
    9
    Well, the Nikon D90 has about the same resolution as the G1 but the size of the sensor is different. A 4/3 sensor is 18 mm x 13.5 mm, whereas Nikon uses an APS C size sensor which is 23.7 mm x 15.7 mm. Panasonic has gotten much better with their image pipeline as time goes on, and as I believe they are supplying sensors to Oly for their 4/3 system Oly is also. Jeff's inclusion of a processed ISO 1600 raw image shows what the system is capable of. It's a lot better than my FZ-50, or for that matter, my old Oly E-1 was at ISO 200. The Nikon is a much larger, heaver camera. If that's not a problem then the D90 would work well for you. My shooting style, when I'm out of the studio, tends toward telephoto so the 2x focal range crop suits me just fine.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    45
    Ah, thx for pointing out my #s mixup.
    Seems like a lot of different sizes; the XSi has yet another sensor size at 22.2 x 14.8mm.
    Panasonic knows to outsource a part (Leica lens) when they can't do it well themselves, but the same reasoning hasn't applied to the image processing engine.
    Fuji F31fd circa March 2007
    Fuji S100fs September 2008

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •