It turns out it is not, despite the name, really a "GF3". It has nothing to do with the predecessors, it's a beginner's camera, not an enthusiast camera. I think Panasonic is really shooting themselves in the foot by confusing their customers like this. (How hard can it be to maintain logical naming conventions, yet nobody ever does it!)
Look at this disconnect, even just visually:
GF1:
GF2:
"GF3":
3 comments:
Eolake,
I just checked my calendar and it's not April 1st. So I have to sincerely ask you to justify our comments on this camera. Did you look at a review, study the specifications, weight, sensor size, ease of use? No affiliation but here is one review that I trust.
This camera actually looks quite attractive based on it's performance and features. Okay, I have thrown down the gauntlet. What do you have to say now?
<http://www.dpreview.com/news/1106/11061310panasonicGF3preview.asp?
Reinking
Sorry that link got truncated. Try this:
But remove the return between the "/"
and "1106131o...."
Reinking
Well, I'm not saying it's a bad camera, probably it is quite good. I just don't think it's the same *line* as the GF1 and GF2, is all. The timing also confirms it, the GF2 is still new.
They might have called it the "GF200" or something.
Post a Comment