I had a terrible time deciding between two cameras in the Micro Four Thirds system. Both cameras have impressive features and excellent quality and both use the same lenses and can be adapted to use Leica M lenses. Naturally the only way to decide was to buy both and try them and ebay the loser. ![]()

The executive summary: I like most everything better on the GF-1 and would choose it over the E-P2 with nearly no thought except for one little thing that is important to me because of my desire to use Leica M mount manual lenses. If I wasn’t into that, the GF-1 would be my no-reservations choice. I used firmware 1.1 with the GF-1 and 1.0 with the EP-2.
The Lumix GF-1 is a solid feeling camera, constructed so that front and back half are joined with a vertical seam on the sides. It feels solid like a brick, there is no “give” when you hold it tightly, no creaking, no anything. Very nice construction. It looks a little boring compared to the E-P2 but feels wonderful. The E-P2 is constructed differently. There is a thin metal sheet that wraps around the camera horizontally and if you hold it in your hand with your fingers on the sides you can squish it. I don’t like the way that feels compared to the GF-1. It is a much more handsome camera IMO, the retro style is quite attractive. Both feel good in the hand. I’m right handed and they work well for me, not sure if they would be as comfortable for a left handed person.

I prefer the power switch on the GF-1. It is a slide on and off type of switch where the E-P2 has a pushbutton toggle. I much prefer the unambiguous nature of the slider, especially when you are operating the camera out of view (like down at your side as you prepare a stealth shot.) The E-P2 also has a fairly bright green ring around the power button which is too bright in low low light shooting. Not sure if that can be disabled or not, I’ve not found a way.
The bottom door for the battery and memory cards is better on the GF-1. It forms the right side of the bottom of the camera with a solid slider that clicks to lock and unlock. When you unlock it the door spring-loads open without help. The E-P2 door is embedded in the bottom right and opens front to back after clicking a recessed switch. The door is not spring loaded and needs to be pulled open, sometimes with a fingernail.

The GF-1 has a dedicated movie button on the top right which is really nice. No mode changing, just push it to start and stop recording a movie instantly. A really nice feature. The E-P2 uses a mode on the main dial for movie shooting. The E-P2’s dial is on the left and recessed under a protective cover accessible only from the back. The GF-1 has the main dial raised up on the right side. I slightly prefer the GF-1 because I can change it one handed.
I didn’t want these cameras for fully automatic point and shoot photography, but it is a nice feature to have if you are in a hurry or feeling lazy. The GF-1 kicks the E-P2’s ass in intelligent automatic mode. It is a bit embarrassing for the EP-2. The EP-2 constantly fails to select the “interesting” subject and is quite a bit slower than the GF-1 in all aspects of operation. In more challenging lighting it will just fail not only to pick a good program, it fails to focus lock and won’t fire the shutter. You can set it to fire the shutter anyway in the preferences, if you want.
I have been using the EVF (electronic viewfinder) on both cameras and while quite a bit larger than the GF-1s, the E-P2 is better. The extra size is spent wisely and gives a better experience overall. Both have diopter adjustments and both will swivel up so you can look down into them instead of “through” like and SLR. Invaluable when sneaking shots without being noticed. I find that people tend to be less aware of being photographed if I’m looking down.

The E-P2 famously doesn’t have a built in flash but I personally don’t care about that because I don’t use it. I guess GF-1 would win on that point if I cared.
I’ve shot hundreds of images now with each body and the battery life on the GF-1 is quite a bit better than the E-P2 using the batteries that came with the kits.
I became interested in these two camera bodies because I wanted to use them with Leica M lenses. Particularly ultra shallow depth of field monsters like the Voightlander Nokton 50mm f1.1 and 35mm f1.2. I would really like to use them with the Leica Noctilux f0.95 but I don’t have $11,000 laying around for lenses.
This is where the rubber meets the road for me on these two bodies. The E-P2 has in-body image stabilization that works with any lens you put on it. The GF-1 uses in-lens stabilization so only lenses with that feature get stabilized. This feature trumps everything else for me. I want this body for hand held, low light, ultra thin depth of field photos. The in-body stabilization gives me at least an extra stop of hand-held goodness and it also gives you rudimentary leveling on-screen or in the EVF.
Using either of these bodies is frustrating with these lenses. It is nearly impossible to tell if you got the shot until it is on the computer. I end up having to use the focus assist mechanism (the EVF or screen zooms in 7x and lets you focus on the patch). The GF-1 is easier to use manual focus assist with because you engage it and focus then tap the shutter release half way to turn it off and frame. The E-P2 you engage the focus assist and then have to disengage it before framing and shooting. I find it annoying, I would much prefer having the shutter button disengage the focus assist like the GF-1.
Custom settings are essential to using manual non-system lenses on these bodies and the GF-1’s custom settings system is much better than the E-P2. There are two custom settings on the main mode dial labeled C1 and C2. You can program these to be whatever combination of settings you want. There are actually sub-sets for each position, but I only ever used 2, setup for my preferences for the lenses I was using at the time. Really nice.
Custom settings on the E-P2 requires a trip to the menu to do a custom “reset.” Kind of clunky compared to selecting C1 or C2 on the main mode dial.
I use a mac and neither raw format RW2 or OVF are supported by the native applications, happily Adobe Camera Raw handles both with ease (wtf Apple … geesh).
The f1.7 20mm kit lens on the GF-1 is beautiful. My favorite lens when I’m not torturing myself with the Noktons. The Olympus 14-42mm kit zoom lens is cool in that it retracts into itself for more compact form factor when not in use, but I don’t notice any particular quality difference over the kit zoom from Panasonic.
As far as HD movies, the E-P2 stores the movies in an AVI format container and the GF-1 uses some sort of MPEG stream format that I have to convert. Both are fine quality, don’t really see a difference in the two bodies however but just like most of the auto focus features on the E-P2 it is so easy to get out of focus movies on the Olympus because IT SUCKS AT AUTO FOCUS and you need to be sure and check that it is recording in focus. So annoying.
So bottom line. If you use the system lenses and don’t torture yourself with ultra low depth of field focus manual lenses, my personal opinion is that the GF-1 kicks the E-P2’s ass around the block. Because of the in-body stabilization, I am choosing the E-P2 because I’m primarily using it for adapted Leica M lenses and the extra wiggle room (hahaahah) the stabilization gives me is worth it.
I’m not a professional photographer, hell I’m not even that great a photographer. I just keep practicing and trying and having fun. These are just my opinions about the two cameras after using them side by side for 3 weeks both at home and on vacation in the Bahamas. Got any questions, comments? Just leave them below or contact me!












[...] as well as some Leica M mount (Nokton f1.1 50mm and Nokton f1.2 35mm). Will post soon. I have posted my thoughts. Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)Olympus E-P2 vs Lumix GF-1 Side by [...]
I have a GF1 that I’ve started experimenting with my old Contax 85mm f/1.4 Planar. I downloaded Firmware 1.1 to get the zoom function that helps in focusing legacy lenses. So far, I’ve got good results. I’m interested in the two lenses you mention–the Nokton 50mm f/1.1 and the 35mm f/1.2. Is the 50mm really that hard to use? Have you tried other film-based lenses?
Yeah they are hard on an LCD camera — even with an EVF. This review sums it up really well. I’ve felt exactly like the poster there, however, I will say that most of the pictures I really love come from the Nokton lenses. Maybe they are easier to use wide open on a Leica M body (8, 8.1, 8.2, 9) but I’ve not tried it yet. I am getting better at it though, but am still often disappointed when I get an image onto the computer and find that it is half an inch out of focus because the person or I moved and there is only 3 inches of in focus depth of field total.
Thanks. Interesting, balanced review on Amazon that you note. Do you notice a big difference between DOF and focusing difficulty at f/1.1. v. 1.2 v. 1.4? I guess that’s a more precise way of asking my previous question. I find 1.4 to be tolerably difficult, but I don’t have any lenses faster than that so I don’t know about relative difficulty.
I used the f1.1 exclusively on a trip to Vegas recently and just got back from a trip using the f1.2 and think that the f1.2 is slightly easier but it is also 35mm vs 50mm which turns into 70mm and 100mm on these camera bodies.
The f1.2 DOF isn’t quite as razor thin as the f1.1 but it is still beautiful and I love what it can do. Also 70mm is a bit easier to use at close range. Still challenging to focus though. I have a 50mm f1.4 from my old Olympus OM-1n that I should get an adapter for and try.
I think I am going to rent an M8.2 body and try them on that and see what it is like. If it makes a huge huge difference I’ll be so screwed because you know I’m going to try to figure out how to buy an M9.
So what’s your overall verdict on the f1.1 v. the f1.2 Noktons? Yep, the focal lengths are different, so it’s not apples and apples, but Is the extra speed of the 1.1 worth the focusing difficulty? Are there any other factors to consider?
If the 50mm -> 100mm wasn’t a problem for me I’d definitely go with the f1.1. It is 50% heavier and more picky but more flexible too. The only reason I’m mostly using the f1.2 now is the wider angle on my camera body. If i had an M9 no question I’d be using the f1.1 50mm all the time.
Great write up. Balanced and seemingly very realistic. I say seemingly because I have to take your word for it as I’ve not had the ability to put the EP-2 through its paces. I chose the GF1 after playing with both in the store because of three factors. First, the LCD was noticeably softer on the EP-2 (being 233k vs 460k), secondly the menus on the EP-2 seemed counter intuitive and tough to navigate, finally I wasn’t able to purchase the EP-2 with the 20mm f/1.7 lens which to me is the only current m4/3 lens that is worth the coin. Not that the other lenses are not optically good, but for the cost, well, I think I could make my money go further on my other camera systems. I enjoyed the review!
Cheers,
Tyson
Yes, I agree about the controls. The E-P2’s menus are not nearly as good as the GF-1 and I really really miss those C1 and C2 settings on the dial. I’m currently in Romania traveling with the E-P2 and the Voightlander f1.2 35mm and the Lumix 20mm. I actually saw a Leica M9 body in a store in the Frankfurt airport and pent an hour just staring at it wiping the drool off my face. LOL.
Is it strange that the mention of the M9 triggered a salivary reaction for me as well…?
Not to mention the 35/1.2.
Enjoy Romania. Look forward to the photo documentation.