Support me by shopping below

The difference as seen below is quite dramatic and the processed RAW file is certainly much punchier, but is it technically any better? Looking closely the boost in sharpening has definitely enhanced a little more fine detail, most apparent in the tree foliage and buildings, but there's still a clumpiness in some of the trees in the second row of crops and also a slight posterised effect where certain details, like house roofs, appear as solid areas of colour. This is a trait I've seen before on some Panasonic cameras, but like these previous models it seems to affect some types of detail more than others.

It's definitely seen worst here on the second row of crops, and turning back to the previous page reveals the Sony NEX-5N and Olympus E-P3 delivering finer spatial and tonal details in those specific trees and rooftops which trip-up the Panasonic. But move onto the third and fourth rows of crops and the processing enhancements made to the GX1's RAW file here have delivered what most would agree to be a visibly superior result to the 5N and E-P3.

This illustrates a particular processing style may suit some types of subjects more than others even if they exist on the same image. More importantly it shows that while the GX1 isn't immune to the occasional clumpiness observed on previous Lumix models, its RAW files can certainly unveil finer details and punchier output if that's what you desire - and given the right subject matter the GX1 can compete and even outclass the best of its rivals on detail at low ISOs.

Now lets see how the camera performs at high sensitivities in my Panasonic GX1 noise results page. Alternatively if you'd like to download some photos to check out for yourself, head over to my Panasonic GX1sample images page, or if you've seen enough proceed directly to my Panasonic GX1 verdict!