I have owned the Ricoh GX100, Canon G9 and Panasonic LX2.
THey all have their strengths and weaknesses...but the LX2 is prob my fave as it is the best balance of size, build and IQ.

That being said...I am sure a lot of people are drooling getting a G10 after MR's "youve got to be kidding" article. THat article is a bit misleading, as I am sure he could have use probably at least 25 other "lesser" cameras that would have 'tricked' the pros looking at the prints.

The problem is, for me, is the lag on these cameras. Pretty useless for street,candid or event photos.

I think if you are going for a G10 you might want to consider an alternative like the one I did.
I got the Olympus E-420 and 25mm 2.8 pancake lens. I paid $600 CAD new w/warranty for it and think it was well worth it. It is not much bigger than the G10 and is a proper SLR (with all it's benefits) PLUS liveview built in. I am sure the files are much better than that from the G10 as well...you just can't beat a larger sensor.

I actually love being limited by it's 50mm equiv. focal length...I forgot what fun it is to shoot with a prime.
GREAT camera and lens combo!

Just thought you guys in G10 might like an alternative way to go....

I'm still going to wait for a truly pocketable point and shoot camera with a fixed focal length lens and a DX or APS-C sensor (larger than what you are suggesting, although not by a lot). I would give up the optical viewfinder for an articulated LCD monitor, that would allow a smaller design because they could lose the mirror. I would accept scaling down performance and features to a bare minimum, just some basic AF and metering capabilities. I'm thinking $500-$600 would be about the right price -- maybe a little more if the lens is outstanding.

Well, I disagree. I thought about doing the same as you, getting the E420 and 25mm pancake. But it' not pocketable and is much more fragile because the lens does not retract into the body. I got the G10 instead, and it's an unbelievable camera. The quality of the lens and files up to iso 200 is astonishing. I own a 5D and L lenses. I haven't done any comparisons yet, but I expect that at iso 80 the G10 will rival or exceed the resolution of the 5D. It's that good. I had an LX3 for a couple of weeks and ended up returning it. I didn't think I'd use it that much because, whereas the quality was good, it wasn't good enough for me. After reading Reichman's and Thom Hogan's reviews I decided to try the G10. Wow! I shot some low light, indoor images last night at iso 400, and they're also excellent. This is some camera. I'm using DPP to convert RAWS. Blows away the LX3. And while heavier (and better built than the LX3), it at least as "pocketable" because the lens fully retracts. I won't hesitate to print files at up to iso 200 at 24" wide. Once DXO Optics supports the G10, it will provide the quality of an M8, with a versatile, excellent zoom lens, with IS, and be more pocketable. Also, you can save zoom settings in the custom settings, so you always have 28mm whenyou turn it on, and can save 35mm and 50mm equivalents as C1 and C2 settings to have a rangefinder-type experience, like with the Ricoh G100 and G200. I will probably get a couple of Voigtlander external viewfinders to use with it.

Well..you should've...as it is no less fragile than the G10 at all, is MUCH better IQ and is responsive (it's an SLR after all). I also own a 5d and L lenses...and comparing the G10's files to it(across the REAL spectrum of a camera's use, not just low ISO under bright light) is no comparison. You're dreaming! I think a lot of people WISH there was a P&S that met the IQ and functionality of a larger, SLR camera. There is just no such beast at this time. Ive tried the G10 and looked at files (shot at 400 ISO, the 'normal' base ISO of SLR shooters), and it still llllaaaagggsss and is still noisy. AS far as it being as 'pocketable' as an LX3 or most other P&S cameras, that's just NOT the case. The LX3 (LX2,LX1) has just the lens part that sticks out and thus still fits in a shirt pocket (a shirt pocket being the base ISO of a pocket...lol). The G series is not a wrist strap camera...and thus is just a small jump to use the e-420.
Anyway..ive actually owned and/or (in case of G10) used them all and the e-420 seems the best option /balance of IQ,function,responsiveness and portability. I'm surprised there aren't a lot of others that have discovered this...it's as if it being an SLR is somehow a turnoff, when most of us shoot with an SLR. Perhaps people feel they need an SLR for one use, and a P&S for another and that using a cheap,small and more limited SLR somehow undermines their 'serious' SLR.
Any other's that have bought/used this combo?

Well..you should've...as it is no less fragile than the G10 at all, is MUCH better IQ and is responsive (it's an SLR after all). I also own a 5d and L lenses...and comparing the G10's files to it(across the REAL spectrum of a camera's use, not just low ISO under bright light) is no comparison. You're dreaming! I think a lot of people WISH there was a P&S that met the IQ and functionality of a larger, SLR camera. There is just no such beast at this time. Ive tried the G10 and looked at files (shot at 400 ISO, the 'normal' base ISO of SLR shooters), and it still llllaaaagggsss and is still noisy. AS far as it being as 'pocketable' as an LX3 or most other P&S cameras, that's just NOT the case. The LX3 (LX2,LX1) has just the lens part that sticks out and thus still fits in a shirt pocket (a shirt pocket being the base ISO of a pocket...lol). The G series is not a wrist strap camera...and thus is just a small jump to use the e-420.
Anyway..ive actually owned and/or (in case of G10) used them all and the e-420 seems the best option /balance of IQ,function,responsiveness and portability. I'm surprised there aren't a lot of others that have discovered this...it's as if it being an SLR is somehow a turnoff, when most of us shoot with an SLR. Perhaps people feel they need an SLR for one use, and a P&S for another and that using a cheap,small and more limited SLR somehow undermines their 'serious' SLR.
Any other's that have bought/used this combo?

Anyone who makes such a post and its their very first post on a message board such as this and pisses on the solid rep of its founder in Michael and I say.... BULL SHIT!! Sounds like someone works for Olympus or just has a hate on for Canon. As my gran'pappy said believe half of what you see and none of what you hear. Lots of luck on me ever dropping a nickel on Olympus junk theres other factors to consider such as brand rep, durability, consitent customer satisfaction etc etc I could go on but theres already too much to that comment for Olympus to stand up against so I'll stop.

This reply is exactly right, and observant. The poster is suspicious, at the very least for suggesting "high IQ" for the LX2. Even the much-vaunted LX3 has very limited areas in which it can compete with the G10. The LX3's contribution to photography was to demonstrate some useful features that can be incorporated (with improvements) into other models and brands. Even Panasonic hedged their bets by releasing a similar sized camera with a bigger zoom range and 15 mp sensor. So it certainly looks like Canon won this round - I can hardly wait for the next round, in Spring 2009.

Holy crap! Are you guys for real?!?! lol...

Did you miss the part that I shoot with a 5d and L glass? Dissing Canon?Pissing on the solid rep of Micheal..wah?!

I don't have ANY brand loyalty...I use the tools I feel are best suited. I would rather question YOUR defensiveness on this topic, as all I did was speak of my personal preference of the products I've actually used...not just talked about/compared reviews & specs from web etc...
It seems ,rather, that you have some sort of hate on for Olympus!

You misquoted me re: LX2 as well....the 'balance' was the thing you see. The IQ diff between GX100, LX2 and G9 are pretty negligable really.

meow..tsk tsk..is everyone this bitchy at this forum? Am I at DPreview..lol.

Just wanted to share my experience and see if any others were shooting with this combo,
sheesh...anyway, better get back to my job planting subliminal advertising for Olympus on photo forums

At least he admits it

Well, I carry my G10 in a Lowepro D-Rez 10 case in my belt. And I also use it with a wrist strap. Try to do that with a E-420 and 28mm pancake lens...

May I suggest a "real world" test? The camera (advanced P&S or small DSLR) that you are still carrying everywhere you go 3 months from now is the right "walk-around" camera for you. That should be about long enough for the novelty and newness of the gear to wear off.

As long as you are making images you like, and are willing to work around the quirks and limitations of the camera, who cares what you use? Hey, if using a daguerreotype for street photography is your thing, go right ahead ;-)

Paul

I haven't seen this style of writing since I got kicked out of cameralabs.com. They didn't appreciate me referring to 'kiddie posters' or 'fratboy' cliques.

Well...I'm sure it WOULD fit in that bag, but that's hardly the point. The camera isn't as small as the G10, of course, but for just a bit more size you get all the functionality of an SLR (frames per second, shutter responsiveness, viewfinder etc.).
I have a small 'diesel' brand bag that I bought in thailand that fits perfect and slings quickly over my shoulder.

Has anyone else bought this camera/lens combo?

I love the concept of a very small DSLR like the Olympus E-420. However, DPReview did not give it a high rating for image quality. Their conclusion states: "Comparatively soft image output in JPEG and RAW". The images were softer than those of its predecessor, the E-410:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/OlympusE420/page25.asp
The resolution numbers aren't bad at all, just not great:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/OlympusE420/page29.asp
(I don't have the E-420 or the G10.)

From their conclusion ...

Let's have a look at the cons then. Unfortunately the first thing that springs to mind here is image quality. The E-420 appears to use a stronger anti-alias filter than its predecessor, and while this results in admirably 'clean' images, it also robs the resultant images of fine detail. Other cameras in this class will no doubt produce output with more per pixel detail. And since this softness is created by the E-420's hardware and not by in-camera software, reverting to raw-shooting won't improve the issue. Of course this comment has to be taken in context; you need to be regularly printing at large sizes or zooming in to a pixel level to see the difference once you've added a bit of sharpening.

High ISO performance is far from class-leading, but for most users producing normal prints it won't be an issue. Dynamic range, however, is worth mentioning. The E-420's DR is not quite up to par with the competition which can offer up to a whole stop more highlight range. So you'll find a washed out sky or unattractively blown highlights in your images a little more often when shooting with the Olympus. Admittedly when talking about the E-420's image quality issues we are - to a certain degree - nitpicking. The camera's output is not bad at all (in fact contrast and colors in the default settings are very appealing), but it's not quite up at the same level as some of the competitors.

I don't know that anyone outside of the dpreview staff agrees with their dynamic range tests so take that with a grain of salt.

Right. The Canon G10 gets a substantially higher resolution rating by DP Review than does the Olympus E-420. It is one of the comparisons used in the LX3 review hear: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicdmclx3/page14.asp

In short, the E-420 is measured horizontal 2050/2350, and vertical 1850/2300.

The G10 is measured horizontal 2450/2750, and vertical 2500/2750.

Given that I will be using the G10 75% of the time at iso 200 or less, and 15-20% of the time at iso 400; I'd much prefer the compactness, better resolution, better zoom range, and image stabilization of the G10. The E420 is a master of nothing, IMHO. It is compact, but not compact enough to throw into a backpack or a large coat pocket, without additional protection. It does not have the outstanding autofocus or low light capabilities of say a Canon 5D, or the lens selection of a 5D. If it were a choice of having an E-420 or a G10 as one's only camera, it might be a closer call, but if one wants a second camera, that's especially compact, to compliment a full-featured DSLR, then the G10 is clearly it.

BTW, I just purchased the G10. Before doing so, I owned the LX3, which I sold after a few weeks because it left me wanting for better resolution (which the G10 delivers in spades; it rates better on resolution than the 5D according to DP Review). I also evaluated purchasing in lieu of a G10 an Oly 420, 520 or Panasonic G1. I have only used the G10 for about a day, but am blown away by the camera. In my mind, the closest equivalent is a Fuji 645 medium format rangefinder, but the G10 is better in almost every way. An apt comparison might be a Mamiya 7, but, although the Mamiya 7 will, under ideal circumstances, produce higher resolution, the G10 is far lighter and more compact, offers a zoom and image stabilization, and has enough resolution to produce fine art quality 24" prints without stitching; with stitching the G10 offers better resolution than a Mamiya 7. I think the G10 is opening up a whole new world of landscape, street photography possibilities, and what about the incredible macro versatility?

That's the only real negative, IMO. Maybe the E430 will address this. Though, if you look at other reviews, it's clear that the 25mm pancake lens is a very VERY mediocre performer. The reviews that use the compact zoom instead rate it higher.

OTOH, it does have the ability to use much better lenses in a pinch and has nice features like mirror lockup. A 12MP version with a very light aa filter(or none at all) would be ideal. Compared to the other SLRs, it's not going to come close. But compared to the pocket cameras... it's worth thinking about.

Wow...is that what everyone at this site do...compare stats and reviews from DPreview and other sites?
Doesn't anyone talk about real practical experience?

I own and use quite a few cameras, and in my REAL practical experience comparing the e-420 w/ 25mm pancake lens is this:

The image quality of the e-420 is much better than the G10.
It shoots in lower light than the G10 with less noise.
It DOES fit in a coat pocket or small bag.

but thats the minor advantages....
You simply can't compare buffer,fps and shutter responsiveness of the e-420 compared to the digi P&S cameras. If you shoot candid,street,event or a plethora of other shooting situations, I don't see how you can get past this with the current crop of digital P&S cameras. I guess for landscape it's not an issue..but for the rest? Why candycoat it...digi P&S cams have yet to reach the level of say the level film compacts reached (Rollie 35, Yashica T4, Leica Minilux et. al).

I also got this combo with the idea I could use the 25mm lens on the new G1 if I should decide to get it.

Whilst I appreciate your like of the Olympus + pancake idea [I briefly considered it myself], not matter how god the image quality and shutter lag is, it no good for me as a carry around camera.
Why - simple it has to be able to fit in my pocket? Any bigger and it simply won't get used for that purpose. The G10, lovely camera as it is disqualifies itself on those grounds as it's a little too big, so the diminutive [for an SLR] Olympus stands no chance, especially if I can only have one focal length it would have to be a 28mm.

I currently use a GX200 as my previous P+S died a month before the new Canon was even announced and it was the least compromised P+S for my needs. And a 24mm-70mm, wow fantastic!
It's flawed in many ways, most noticably with the high ISOs, but it has some very nice touches to the design.
I'm still waiting for something the same size and quality of my Olympus XA film camera - now that is a good camera.

Yes..I had a few XA's before as well. I used a german Rollie 35 most of the time as it had killer optics, but loved the XA for its clamshell design and image quality.

My guess is that a comparitive digital P&S is still a few years away. They ALL have shutter lag and slow buffers...

oops..dbl post

Does anyone here have any insights into the technical problems of designing a P&S with negligible shutter lag, a large, fast buffer and a fast frame rate? Such a camera would certainly be more expensive, but what about the weight and bulk? Perhaps an LX3 with the additional circuitry to allow for a bigger and faster buffer and negligible shutter lag, would end up being about the same size and weight of a G10.

Just curious what the problems are. The benefits would be very significant, especially considering the auto-align features in Photoshop which make possible the merging to HDR of bracketed hand-held shots.

I also had one of those (might still have it stored away with the rest of my film cameras) and thought it was brilliant for what it was. But what I'd really love is something like a digital Leica/Minolta CL (with or without interchangeable lenses) with a proper optical viewfinder along with the LCD display.

Paul

The best of the digital pocket cameras are the Fujis due to how their sensors work. They are the best for low light, but they are NOT going to be as good as a SLR. The E420 is good merely because of its size. The problem with this sort of use is that you either are talking about an old 35mm pancake lens or similar. But this means a motor in the body or full manual AND a nasty conversion factor. Of the models that I like for this sort of thing, my vote goes to the smaller Sony/Minolta's, because of the dirt cheap used lenses.

The best pocket camera for this sort of use is a range finder with film. It's dead simple, can usually be run with higher speed film for low light, has zero lag, and no buffer issues. IIRC, a couple of the more modern ones have built in winders and so on as well.

http://www.ph.utexas.edu/~yue/misc/AnscAgfa.html
Or something similar.

Or, just get this when it comes out:
http://www.camerapedia.org/wiki/Fuji_GF670
Fits in your pocket, should take awesome pictures. I just hope it doesn't cost a fortune... If it's under $1000, I'll get one myself...
(automatic everything folding 120 camera - it has me drooling already)

Ray,

The shutter lag of recent high end compacts is actually close to zero, faster that DSLRs since there is no mirror. What delays the whole process is contrast based AF.

I don't think that there is any technical problem with including a larger buffer, it must be a cost issue.

As far as frame rates is concerned, I am not sure why they cannot be made to be faster. It could be that RAW files are in fact processed to avoid showing the extend of the disaster with noise... wihch would explain why it takes more time.

Cheers,
Bernard

I have the G9 and really don't like it. I don't mean that camera as opposed to another p&s, I mean the whole p&s thing.

It sounded great but I just cannot work with it. You press to shoot and then the camera thinks for a bit and the moment is gone. You need to shift focus in a hurry but there is no focus ring you can give a quick manual shift on. Your subject is very strongly backlit and you need to quickly overexpose, now what. The camera is off and you see something interesting so you turn it on and wait as the the lens pokes it way out of its little hidey hole. Perhaps there are ways to figure all this out but it was beyond me. A multitude of tiny little buttons and a viewfinder from hell. I gave the camera to my wife.

I really don't mean that all you guys are wrong about this, it just does not work for me and I am sure that I am not alone on this.

Thats the reason of this post/thread really. That I believe the only (afoordable) option for a small digital camera is a small SLR with a small Lens.
They just haven't made a P&S yet that doesn't lag. I suppose for a lot of landscape users that is fine, as they have a bit longer 'moments' to capture.

No one going to mention the opportunities offered by the new m4/3 standard? Much better than the E-420 for that genre, at least the potential is.

In one of the other G10 threads I mentioned it. The only one that exists so far isn't all that small and there are questions about lens quality.

Edit: Added an 'n'.

One very viable way of using the G10, is to set the custom functions (there are 2) to particular zoom focal lengths (the CFs remember that, such as 35mm and 50mm equivalents). Then you have 28mm, 35mm, and 50mm preset. When you want to do quick street shooting, you preset manual focus at about 2 meters, and using f4 (or maybe f4.5 for the 50mm equivalent), you will then have virtually everything in focus, given the enormous depth of field with the small sensors. To speed up shooting even more, you can preset white balance to daylight, tungsten, whatever. That will take away the additional pause while the camera calculates auto white balance. If you do this, while shooting RAW, then you have an extremely fast reacting, with virtually no shutter lag, rangefinder. I will probably buy some CV viewfinders to use with it in this manner.

As I said, the potential...

Actually looking forward to the Olympus and the upcoming pany pancake. Added to which the adaptors for M lenses and others already exist for the pany. Good times ahead!

Pom,
good to hear from you, and I agree that m4/3 has at least the potential to provide some pocketable cameras (or at least "jacket pocketable") with better performance than the current smaller sensor high end compacts like the G10. For one thing, designing a good quality compact normal prime should be easier for m4/3 than for 4/3 or "APS-C" SLRs, because m4/3 allows the lens to sit far closer to the sensor.

I wonder how small a high quality EVF can be: the Panasonic G10's EVF seems to be the best EVF so far in a still camera, but at the cost of not being as compact as some would like. Maybe offering a VF image size bigger than in any 4/3 or APS-C SLR is the reason for its bulk.

How ironic.... I bought an extra 420 and 25mm lens for my father's b-day. He beat me to the punch and had already bought himself one.I figure I'll get the LX3 as 24mm and 2.0 sounds great for a small camera, and i've had good experience with the LX1 and LX2.

Lensfactory: I find your post offensive. This entire thread now looks like you are just trying to drum up demand to sell your item. If one is looking at a DSLR, there are many other products I'd rather have than the Oly 420 and 25mm lens, including, for instance, a Canon Rebel xsi and a Canon 35mm f2 lens, or a Pentax with one of the Pentax limited primes and IS built into the body. If one is going to get the Oly 420, why not buy an Oly 520 at Amazon (they're going for very low prices) and get IS built into the body and use that with the 25mm pancake?

Those other's aren't as small... My post was about an alternative to the G10.In answer to your question why not get the Oly 520,the e-520 is larger...and to get it with the 25mm lens, more expensive.

I'm sure people are a bit more discerning that they can tell if this is all just some pitch to sell some equipment. I'm trying to be helpful....
I'll have no problem selling it in Toronto at that price.
Is everyone in this forum so suspicious and negative?
Personally I find THAT offensive.

Only of people who only post in the thread where they're trying to sell something.

What about the fixed lens Sigma? Has a much better FL for my tastes. Slower camera, tho.

I'll probably devote C2 to this, good idea indeed.

Cheers,
Bernard

Well... maybe you should actually try to fit the E-420 plus 25mm pancake lens into the D-Rez10. It will not fit. And no, that is not hardly the point. The point is, I can carry the G10 in a small belt pack, something I would not be able to do with the E-420 plus 25mm pancake lens. For that, I would need a small shoulder bag, or holster style bag.

To each its own, of course.

I fit it in a small belt pack....Ia a leather fanny pack I got at a garage sale.Maybe not AS small as yours, but that's because the Oly isnt as small as the G10...
...obviously

The point is ANY DSLR is going to be better than any P&S in so many ways. Except for size...but this one comes close!

Dear oh dear! What an unfriendly post. Usually, I'd just let this go, realising some people have stronger blinkers on than others but I've got to take you on with a few points here.
1) "Olympus junk .... etc. You clearly have forgotten all the recent issues that Canon have had with tilted viewfinders and focus issues on their flagship models. Plus, the build quality on the cheaper Olympus cameras/lenses is way better than the cheaper Canons (just go into a shop and handle one and you'll understand). Actually, your comments have blatant bias and we could go into this in great depth but, basically, you're either badly informed or mischievous. I use both Canon and Olympus systems so I do not consider I can be biased here.
2) The original post made sense to the poster and will to many others too. It is interesting how people who are fans of (usually) Canon and Nikon endlessly point out the disadvantages of the smaller sensors on the 4/3 system cameras compared to the APS based sensors. They are right that there are disadvantages but there are, equally, advantages. Now, someone has pointed out an example in which the shoe is on the other foot, in that the Olympus 420 has a much bigger sensor than the G10 with clear advantages and you have got all defensive over the smaller sensor. Very amusing.
3) Someone makes a reasonable first post and you go straight into attack mode. That's just plain unfriendly and not called for at all.
4) Everything in having camera choice is about finding the compromise that fits you best. We all have to give up something to get something else. In this case, it is about what you do not want to give up in a small camera in a modest price range, possibly the trickiest part of the market. All cameras mentioned in this thread are great, all can produce large, good quality prints (surely the important thing on a "landscape" forum?). All have their limitations and for some, the option posted in the start of this thread certainly overcomes some of the limitations of the tiny sensored G10, even if it then introduces other limitations. Hammering someone because of what you choose personally is futile and helps no one.

Despite the polemical nature of the OP, i find this tread interesting.
The G10 appears to be of interest to serious photographers, much as the G9 was. I must say that I too am attracted to it.
I was at one time interested in the E420 & 25mm pancake combo myself. But after examining lens tests on it, I concluded that it it was not for me.
P&S cameras can do rather well at low ISO's and non-huge print sizes. My Fuji's (F20, s6000fd, s9100) bear that out.

My main "carry around" right now, is a Nikon D60 with a 35mm f/2 AF-D lense. On that body, it manually focuses, but fully meters, and the lense is wonderful, optically. Its perspective is similar to a 52mm in 35mm format terms. For me, it was a good way to go, since my other DSLR is also a Nikon, as are most of my film bodies.

The "pocketable" aspect is a siren song to me though

That new Foveon one with a normal lens, (Sigma something), or perhaps a future generation of Micro-4/3, or............. a G10......................

In relation to these considerations does anyone recall or own the Canon "Pro1"? When I bought mine (mists of time) it looked a far better option than the consumer DRSLs available at that point. Metal construction, F2.8, 28mm equiv. X 5, articulated screen, decent ergonomics, WA and TC lenses available. A bit bigger than its siblings at the time and now, but about the same as the current 4/3 cameras (who dreamed up that ridiculous designation?)

Unfortunately it wasn't as robust as it looks (are any non-professional cameras?) Dropping it from about 18" cost me £150 (fixed charge). Then I got it wet a couple of years ago and now it's brain has become subject to wandering, like my own. I'm reluctant to spend yet another £150 on repairs which would mean that its TCO would come to £900!!!

But I think it was ahead of its time. Is it worth spending £400 to replace it with a G10? Hmm.