<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: G1 discontinued?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://pindelski.org/Photography/2010/01/15/g1-discontinued/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://pindelski.org/Photography/2010/01/15/g1-discontinued/</link>
	<description>This journal discusses photography in all its guises with an emphasis on the art of making photographs.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 May 2012 22:48:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Thomas Pindelski</title>
		<link>http://pindelski.org/Photography/2010/01/15/g1-discontinued/comment-page-1/#comment-45019</link>
		<dc:creator>Thomas Pindelski</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Feb 2010 15:14:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pindelski.org/Photography/?p=5517#comment-45019</guid>
		<description>I stand corrected.  I should have written that the L1 has a lousy optical viewfinder:

&lt;center&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.pindelski.org/Blog/LIvf.jpg&quot; width=&quot;595&quot; height=&quot;250&quot;/&gt;&lt;/center&gt;

DPReview has the &lt;a href[http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/PanasonicDMCL1/page3.asp target=_blank rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;details&lt;/a&gt;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I stand corrected.  I should have written that the L1 has a lousy optical viewfinder:</p>
<p><center><img src="http://www.pindelski.org/Blog/LIvf.jpg" width="595" height="250"/></center></p>
<p>DPReview has the <a href[http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/PanasonicDMCL1/page3.asp target=_blank rel="nofollow">details</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim</title>
		<link>http://pindelski.org/Photography/2010/01/15/g1-discontinued/comment-page-1/#comment-45018</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Feb 2010 06:08:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pindelski.org/Photography/?p=5517#comment-45018</guid>
		<description>The L1 doesn&#039;t have a lousy EVF, it has no EVF it is an optical viewfinder because it is a DSLR! Also the sensor is not mediocre, it is susceptible to poor exposures more than some, but properly exposed even ISO is usable. I also have newer Olympus DSLRs and the image quality from the L1 in some respects exceeds them when MP are scaled. The L1 and L10 have very week AA filters, which makes output extremely sharp. The L1 has excellent colour reproduction but benefits from working in RAW. If you work in RAW you will find the DR is amongst the best in class. Plus no mention was made of three of the L1&#039;s best features, the bounce flash, the quality of construction and the feel in the hand.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The L1 doesn&#8217;t have a lousy EVF, it has no EVF it is an optical viewfinder because it is a DSLR! Also the sensor is not mediocre, it is susceptible to poor exposures more than some, but properly exposed even ISO is usable. I also have newer Olympus DSLRs and the image quality from the L1 in some respects exceeds them when MP are scaled. The L1 and L10 have very week AA filters, which makes output extremely sharp. The L1 has excellent colour reproduction but benefits from working in RAW. If you work in RAW you will find the DR is amongst the best in class. Plus no mention was made of three of the L1&#8242;s best features, the bounce flash, the quality of construction and the feel in the hand.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

