You last visited: Today at 08:13 PM
|Topic Review (Newest First)|
|04-16-2013 02:08 PM|
Its also being offered at Panasonic web site for 499.00. Here is the link http://shop.panasonic.
|02-23-2013 07:11 PM|
|360glitch||Still no refund for me. Not very happy.|
|02-21-2013 10:14 PM|
|Ringo*||I got the refund today.|
|02-21-2013 10:50 AM|
|cheapazn||I called and they said its at the billing department and will be refunded at the end of today or the latest tomorrow.|
|02-21-2013 08:54 AM|
Great, these douchebags actually *Charged* my credit card (no paypal).
Is there any legal recourse? I just want to make a complaint because of how ass-wipey this has been.
|02-21-2013 06:55 AM|
|360glitch||No refund yet here either. *sigh*|
|02-20-2013 07:42 PM|
|cheapazn||anyone got there their refund yet? I'd paid with PayPal and it has not popped back into my account.|
|02-20-2013 09:14 AM|
|02-20-2013 08:51 AM|
|02-20-2013 08:10 AM|
These farkbags just emailed me saying they're cancelling my order
Why couldn't they do that after a day.
|02-20-2013 07:43 AM|
|02-19-2013 05:21 PM|
|cheapazn||anyone got it shipped yet? still says "sent to warehouse"|
|02-18-2013 12:35 AM|
i have a GF3 (similar sensor as the G5) and a Nex-6... the nex trumps the gf3 in low light... much larger sensor = simple physics but there is a distinct lack of good prime lenses for the nex range
i have tried both the $1000 zeiss 24mm and the $500 sony 35mm f1.8 and both pale in comparison to the $500 leica f1.4 and the $300 panasonic 20mm f1.7 on the m43 system
i like the ability to dial up to 6400 iso and get awesome night shots using the sony 35mm f1.8, but with decent lighting the panasonic with the 20mm lens at f1.7 produces superior shots at iso 3200... its not just the noise factor from the lower iso but the bokeh is much creamier and there is noticeable less purple fringing and distortion
its similar to the rx100 vs the lumix lx7: the rx100 can pull of better low light shots thanks to a larger sensor but in most situations the glass on the panasonic is superior and gives much better results
|02-18-2013 12:14 AM|
5N image quality is better, period. Maybe I'm wrong, but I assume most people would rank IQ highly with cost and size when buying a camera.
Put a fast prime lens on the 5N and compare to the G5 and you're back to square one.
The reason I'm commenting here is because I bought a G3 and an N5, and returned the G3. I got the G3 and the N5 each for $300 with lens via slickdeals. For the same money, the N5 is a no-brainer.
|02-17-2013 06:14 PM|
You can't directly compare focal length and aperture though, as some lenses have a higher aperture (e.g. F1.8) simply to keep the size down while retaining image quality even when wide open.
To add to it, Olympus and Panasonic have been going after high-end lenses and they stopped going after crappy lenses quite a while back. Kit lenses and your generic telephoto being the exception. The current stable of lenses is really not that bad, since you have a prime for nearly every focal length except for the long-end (coming next year?). Panasonic has constant aperture lenses out and Olympus is about to release some. Since all these are relatively new, the price won't drop anytime soon and that's where most of the high prices come from.
|This thread has more than 15 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|