Insanity!

[froyd]

There has always been a price gap between the G1 and the G2, but these days it's getting ridiculous! I was looking around KEH's site and there's $500 difference between the two cameras in comparable condition: G1 EX+ $133, G2 in EX+ $645.

Having tried both (and chosen the G1 for it's better looks, marked focus wheel, and size/weight) I cannot imagine how the $500+ can be rationalized.

If you are in the market for the G system, there's no reason not to spend $100 on a G1 either as the primary body or at least as a back-up!

[StefanJozef]

I had both but sold the G2 because I prefer the G1. I noticed recently the price differential between the two bodies has increased noticeably. I might just buy another G1 as a back-up.

[Bob Michaels]

The general public has always believed the G2 was a much better camera simply because it was released later, 2 is higher than 1, and most importantly that it cost more money.

I owned both G1 and G2 bodies for about 7-8 years. I used the G1 about 95% of the time while the G2 became the backup.

[Brian Legge]

Interesting. I was curious about the difference and found a whole lot of feedback from users online suggesting that the G2 autofocus was more reliable than the G1.

I wonder if that was model variation or selective memory.

[Dez]

I suspect it may be a rationalizing process after having spent so much on the G2. I have a G1 which I hardly ever use, and by spending a fortune I could trade it in on a G2, enabling me to use a couple of wide angle lenses I cannot afford. Not an overwhelmingly attractive idea.

Cheers,
Dez

[gavinlg]

I have a G1. It's a good camera. AF is pretty damn accurate. I will eventually get a G2 body just to compare, but I don't think it will be worth the extra $400 or so somehow...