"Panasonic G series" Owners Thread
- Thread starter hillwalkinggirl
- Start date
woof woof
I like a nice Chianti
- Messages
- 39,685
- Name
- Alan
- Edit My Images
- No
I have a GX80 and a GX9 and I usually take the GX80, maybe it's just inverse snobbery. I see no real difference in IQ between them but I suppose that means that the extra MP's of the GX9 come free with no hit to IQ.
I'd take either of these over a GX8 to avoid the shutter shock issue and in fact I did.
I think the G100 offers the best IQ I've seen from MFT but I haven't had any other newer camera, just the GF1, G1, GX7 and G7, GM5, GX80, GX9 and G100. I'd love the G100 if it had an additional or just a clickable near top of camera control wheel. I detest the vertical back control wheel and I can't use the camera without accidentally jogging it.
GX100 and 100-400mm at ISO 1,000.
The g100 for me lacks IBIS for night photography, which kills it for me. I wonder what makes the IQ better than the gx9 though? I was always happy enough with the IQ from gx80. If they remade the gx8 with the mechanical shutter of the gx80, gave it the same IBIS and tilting screen and kept weather sealing and big viewfinder then I’d be willing to buy that as soon as it was available. One can dream
woof woof
I like a nice Chianti
- Messages
- 39,685
- Name
- Alan
- Edit My Images
- No
I normally use lenses in the 28/35/50mm equivalent range with shutter speeds high enough to freeze movement so the lack of IBIS isn't an issue for me as the slower shutter speeds at which it would help possibly wouldn't be adequate to freeze movement in even a posed shot. When going for a more scenic shot where movement of people isn't an issue I suppose something like 1/50 or even a little less could still be possible. I don't do low light pictures these days and I don't have a lot of very low light MFT pictures as I have FF for that but looking back at low light holiday ones I have, for street lighting type levels of light f1.7 and 1/80 at ISO 1,600 seemed to give acceptable results with my GF1 so I'd expect newer kit to do better.
This possibly shows more detail than was visible by eye at the time.
I can't say what makes the G100 the best IQ camera I've had but from what I've read it is a different processor so maybe that has something to do with it. Or maybe it's just because it's the newest MFT camera I've had.
Last edited:
That is a great photo. I tend not to freeze people in my shots, which is why I tend to opt for lower shutter speeds and rely heavily on IBIS. I suppose different cameras evoke different styles of photography. I put my gx8 on eBay this evening. Also trying to sell a Pentax kp. Great camera, but the range of lenses is a little baffling and I’ve decided I don’t want to invest into that eco system. I also have a Fuji x-e2 which I adore, but lacks IBIS. So, I might use the money from camera sales towards a Fuji x-s10 for the ibis. An x-t4/5 would probably be perfect but those are out of my price range really for what I’m prepared to spend on one camera that I won’t use too often. I’m sorry this has gone a bit off topic for this forum. X-s10 or something weather sealed with IBIS such as the Panasonic g80, which is also cheaper than the the Fuji on the secondhand market? The Fuji x-e2 is great for manual focus lenses and I’m yet to find a mft camera that works as well as it does for manual focusing. I can only assume that the x-s10 is at least just as good as the x-e2 for manual focus. But is there an mft that can rival Fuji in this regard? Olympus cameras have this annoying system of focusing in colour when taking b&w photos which I can’t get used to. The gx8 focus peeking is very sensitive and can sometimes feel like it’s almost non existent even though the photos are probably perfectly sharp where they’re meant to be. Too much choice and no dream camera as of yet lol.
- Messages
- 2,160
- Name
- Steve, Coventry, England
- Edit My Images
- Yes
It has a Live MOS sensor instead of a CMOS sensor, and has a slightly better low light sensitivity.
The different processor probably also makes a difference, mainly on JPEGS
Can't say I could actually see any difference though between the G100 and the G9, but didn't keep the G100 due to its low maximum shutter speed and poorer ergonomics
woof woof
I like a nice Chianti
- Messages
- 39,685
- Name
- Alan
- Edit My Images
- No
I haven't shot jpegs for a long time.
As above, the G100 may only be the best MFT camera I've had for IQ because my cameras aren't very new but I see the difference in raws. The stats also say it has a slight advantage over my GX9 for DR too and that seems to be showing up in use for me.
The only downside for me is that vertical control wheel on the back. I hate it. If the camera had two top of camera controls or even one clickable one as per the G1 I'd love it.
- Messages
- 2,160
- Name
- Steve, Coventry, England
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Yes it does have a marginal DR advantage, 0.4EV, which I am sure I could not see
If I am worried about DR, or specifically want it wide, a 5X1 bracket multiplies the DR by around 1.5, which can then be adjusted when merging
woof woof
I like a nice Chianti
- Messages
- 39,685
- Name
- Alan
- Edit My Images
- No
Yes it does have a marginal DR advantage, 0.4EV, which I am sure I could not see
If I am worried about DR, or specifically want it wide, a 5X1 bracket multiplies the DR by around 1.5, which can then be adjusted when merging
DR is often one of the most crucial things to me as I'm often on the edge of what the kit can cope with and I don't like to either blow significant amounts of the highlights or end up with boosted beyond what the kit can cope with shadows to the point that the degradation becomes clearly visible so yes, even 0.4 is significant as it gives just that little bit extra. Bracketing is not something that's always possible as it takes additional time during which movement can occur and then there's the additional processing hassles.
Each to their own but for me the more DR in a single shot the better.
You’re tempting me to get a g100 now. I’m guessing this live MOS and updated processor can also be found on the g9 ii? I’ve not actually bothered looking at the specs of that as it’s more than I’d be willing to fork out for a camera.
I just adapted a canon 50mm f1.8 stm using a viltrox efm2 adapter and I have to say it just feels right at home on the gx8. It’s a bit slow to focus, but I’m okay with that. It’s making me reconsider putting the gx8 on Evil bay. Although the clunky, loud mechanical shutter is still proving to be an issue for me now I’ve been spoilt by other cameras.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 2,160
- Name
- Steve, Coventry, England
- Edit My Images
- Yes
The G9, GX9 and G80 use a CMOS sensor (as does the new G9 II) (I haven;t looked at other models, just the ones I have and the G9 II I would like
)The main things on the G100 I didn't like were the lack of a rear wheel "opposite" the front wheel, the slow max mechanical shutter speed and the lack of IBIS. (The one I tried had problems holding focus on video, but that wasn't an issue for me as I didn't want to use it for video).
I ended up with a GX9 as a "small" camera, and it has done what I wanted well
The lens adaption interesting, will be interesting to hear how often you use that length.
woof woof
I like a nice Chianti
- Messages
- 39,685
- Name
- Alan
- Edit My Images
- No
I got the G100 as I was looking to replace the G1 experience but the lack of a second (or just one clickable) near top of camera dial really spoils it for me. Another reason I got it was because I'd read that it has a nice evf, and it has. It is a compact and light mini slr design but there are drawbacks.
The lack of IS doesn't really bother me as I don't tend to use shutter speed and focal length combinations which would be helped by it or indeed slow shutter speeds as I'm probably more concerned with preventing blur due to subject movement. The low max mechanical shutter speed doesn't seem to be an issue for me either as I'm happy to let it automatically switch to the much faster electronic shutter when needed and I don't tend to shoot things which would be affected by rolling shutter.
There are positives. The IQ is nice for MFT, it's small and light with a nice evf and it has that feature, I can't remember what it's called, where it combines pictures taken in a sequence over time to make a final picture.
PS.
I forgot something about the G100...
When I first got mine I noticed that lens corrections were not being automatically done in camera and being baked into the raw, Adobe PS CS5 just wasn't seeing them. I spoke to tech support at the dealer and he said that the corrections are not baked in as they've been with every other MFT camera I've had. I later switched to the Adobe subscription software and they are now automatically applied by that software presumably by using lens profiles rather than being applied "in camera" and being immediately visible when opening the raw. Just something to consider if looking at this camera.
Close with a picture
Mrs WW about to enjoy an ice cream. G100 and Oly 17mm f1.8.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 2,160
- Name
- Steve, Coventry, England
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I got the G100 as I was looking to replace the G1 experience but the lack of a second (or just one clickable) near top of camera dial really spoils it for me. Another reason I got it was because I'd read that it has a nice evf, and it has. It is a compact and light mini slr design but there are drawbacks.
The lack of IS doesn't really bother me as I don't tend to use shutter speed and focal length combinations which would be helped by it or indeed slow shutter speeds as I'm probably more concerned with preventing blur due to subject movement. The low max mechanical shutter speed doesn't seem to be an issue for me either as I'm happy to let it automatically switch to the much faster electronic shutter when needed and I don't tend to shoot things which would be affected by rolling shutter.
There are positives. The IQ is nice for MFT, it's small and light with a nice evf and it has that feature, I can't remember what it's called, where it combines pictures taken in a sequence over time to make a final picture.
PS.
I forgot something about the G100...
When I first got mine I noticed that lens corrections were not being automatically done in camera and being baked into the raw, Adobe PS CS5 just wasn't seeing them. I spoke to tech support at the dealer and he said that the corrections are not baked in as they've been with every other MFT camera I've had. I later switched to the Adobe subscription software and they are now automatically applied by that software presumably by using lens profiles rather than being applied "in camera" and being immediately visible when opening the raw. Just something to consider if looking at this camera.
Close with a picture
View attachment 404889
I don't know if the corrections on other cameras (Panasonic) are "baked in" as I normally associate that with something that can not be removed or undone, maybe that is not the way the term is usually taken though.
Using Affinity (and I imagine there must be other software that can do the same) the in camera lens corrections included in the RAW files can be switched off.
Yes, I remember your discussions when you got it
woof woof
I like a nice Chianti
- Messages
- 39,685
- Name
- Alan
- Edit My Images
- No
I don't know if the corrections on other cameras (Panasonic) are "baked in" as I normally associate that with something that can not be removed or undone, maybe that is not the way the term is usually taken though.
Using Affinity (and I imagine there must be other software that can do the same) the in camera lens corrections included in the RAW files can be switched off.
Yes, I remember your discussions when you got it
Whatever the correct term... I believe until told otherwise
that with MFT the correction information is usually applied more in camera rather than being applied in post processing as an add on post capture lens profile. If that makes sense. I've certainly never had to tick any boxes post capture with any of my other MFT cameras, corrections just happened. They just happen now with CS2023 but the difference is that in CS2023 they're clearly visible as a lens profile whilst in CS5 they are not and in that package there is no visible lens profile applied and ticking the box or making sure it isn't ticked makes no difference to the picture so there is something different going on with the G100 files at least when using and comparing what happens with G100 raws and processing them with CS5 and CS2023.I remember at the time being quite taken aback when seeing distortion in pictures taken with the G100 and Oly 17mm f1.8 as I'd never seen that before despite using that lens on multiple cameras. I was told at the time that they'd done the G100 like this to keep the cost and bulk/weight down.
- Messages
- 2,160
- Name
- Steve, Coventry, England
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Whatever the correct term... I believe until told otherwise
I remember at the time being quite taken aback when seeing distortion in pictures taken with the G100 and Oly 17mm f1.8 as I'd never seen that before despite using that lens on multiple cameras. I was told at the time that they'd done the G100 like this to keep the cost and bulk/weight down.
The lens correction info in not "applied" in camera. (except in payback mode)
The camera reads the correction info from the lens, and then includes that in the RAW file.
(Each lens includes in its firmware a table of corrections for different focal lengths. which is the same info as would be in the software as a provided profile)
The software then uses that info as the profile and automatically applies it when loading the RAW file.
It would seem from my memory of your initial findings, that the G100 does not read the info from the lens and add it to the RAW file, so a profile has to exist in the software, or correction done manually.
woof woof
I like a nice Chianti
- Messages
- 39,685
- Name
- Alan
- Edit My Images
- No
We seem to be going in circles with this and tbh and sorry for this but I think you're playing with words here.
I say the camera (other than the G100) applies the changes in camera and you say what I've highlighted above. I really don't see the distinction you are making here as the camera (other than the G100) puts the data into the raw along with everything else in the camera and your software (hopefully) then sees it, or not. This is imo clearly a different way of doing things than applying a post capture lens profile which exists as a completely separate piece of software on your pc.
So, this is my last reply to you on this as my aim was just to provide additional info for anyone thinking of buying a G100 but if we keep on with this we might end up confusing people and that would be a shame.
The G100 works differently to every other MFT camera I've used and this was confirmed to me by the dealers support personnel.
The end result is that lens corrections may not be applied by some post capture software, for example CS5, but can in other software be applied by using a post capture lens profile which can be applied automatically or by box ticking in the lens correction section of that other software, such as CS2023.
With CS5 and possibly with some other software too with any other MFT camera and lens when you open a raw file the lens corrections are applied without having to load a post capture lens profile but this is not the case with the G100. With the G100 it doesn't just happen and in that package if you try to apply a lens profile you may find it isn't available. Therefore if you owned a G100 and shot raw and used CS5 or a similar package you'd need to either find a lens profile you could download and add to the software or make your own.
In PS2023 and presumably with other similar software lens corrections are available as a lens profile.
I do see a difference between information which is included in the raw straight from the camera, and yes, effectively baked in as it's invisible to the user in some software such as CS5 and a post capture lens profile applied in post capture processing software on your pc. To me what happens with the corrections when using other MFT cameras is sort of like what happens with some other stuff like NR and sharpening these days in that it is in the file and there may be no way of seeing what it is or altering it unless using certain software which can reveal it and allow changes.
Using an AF MFT lens on a G100 (depending on your software) is almost like using an old manual no electronic connection lens like a Minolta Rokkor 50mm f1.7 in that lens corrections will not be applied when you open a raw in software such as CS5. They have to be applied either manually or with the use of a lens profile which you might have to find online or make yourself. With other software such as CS2023 the software recognises the modern MFT lens you've used and then applies a lens profile. This is to me clearly a different way of doing things than what happens when using any other MFT camera I've ever used.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 2,160
- Name
- Steve, Coventry, England
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Not playing with words at all, just making it clear what actually happens, and I did not deny what you eventually found with the G100, and nor did I disagree with what you said about the software you use, I only mentioned that with Affinity could choose whether to apply those corrections or not.
I did not disagree or speak against your last two paragraphs either
Being applied and baked in in the camera is like JPEG processing where you can't "un-apply" it, and is to me, very different to being included in the camera file.
I think it is important that when something is raised., that it is properly explained
Are you not playing with words to disguise your not knowing how it actually worked
It appears so from previous posts, and also sorry to mention it.There are quite a few more points I could raise, but I will also make this my last post on it here
- Messages
- 2,160
- Name
- Steve, Coventry, England
- Edit My Images
- Yes
G90
gx9 if you want something compact. G80/90 if you want weather sealing and much better viewfinder. I used to rock a g80 and gx80 combo which was hands down the best combination of cameras I’ve owned. If the gx9 had the weather sealing and viewfinder of the gx8, it would’ve been close to perfect. I don’t know from personal use if the difference between the g80 and g90 is worth the extra price. I’ve actually just ordered myself another g80 after selling my gx8 and managed to get it for a very good price secondhand. The major gripe I had with the gx8 was the loud and clunky mechanical shutter which won’t be an issue with any of the cameras you’re looking at.
To add to the comment above, I think even on the secondhand market there’s not much difference in price between g90 and g9. So, I’d look closely at both options if the price difference is minimal. But, I managed to get a g80 today on Evil bay for less than £210, including postage and I know from past experience that I enjoyed using it.
- Messages
- 2,160
- Name
- Steve, Coventry, England
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I agree, however it was not part of the question.
No idea what the intended use is, no idea what part of the world the OP is in (prices differ, especially the G90, weather etc).
G80 is 16MB the other two are 20MB, as you say the GX9 is more compact, but has other limitations that may affect the choice.
Bring the G9 into the choice, and that would be the answer
It is a huge leap above the G80 and G90Withe the relevant information, the answers may be different.
I think you need to pick up each camera to see which is right for you. I’ve recently picked up a g80 for the second time and I do like it. Although I did also love my gx80, which I used more. The g80 being saved for bigger lenses and when weather sealing may have been necessary. And for some reason I can’t quite put my finger on, I prefer the handling of a gx80 over a gx9.
- Messages
- 248
- Name
- Andrew
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Well that show's how dumb I am lol. Just spent a few hours playing with the G5 and a flash gun, everthing was fine for a while, then I made a few changes to my in camera settings so as to try different things like NR, vivid colour etc etc, all of a sudden the flash option is greyed out on my menu, but greyed out on all settings including manual, aperture mode shutter mode even custom settings lol, I tried resetting the camera and it all worked again, then nope it was gone again. This went on for quite a while, until my brain sort of engaded and I finally figured out that the flash is unavailable with the electronic shutter lol, well thats a couple of hours wasted, but a lesson learned, typical of me, I have to learn the hard way. I like taking close up shots so a lot of the time a flash would be useful, but at the same time I don't want to wear the shutter out, guess I cant have both, so just going to set C1 for flash with mechanical shutter (if I can) and leave the rest on electronic shutter if that will work.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 2,160
- Name
- Steve, Coventry, England
- Edit My Images
- Yes
You're not the first and won't be the last to find that out (though most won't admit to it, I didn't get caught
)Don't worry about wearing the shutter out, you would need to be a heavy user or very young to do that!
For close up shots, try styrofoam or crumpled cooking foil glued to card. Often helps and very cheap.
You can also get LED rings that fit on the front of the lens that are not costly. Not as powerful as flash, but work for some.
- Messages
- 248
- Name
- Andrew
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Thanks Sangoma, going to look for a diffuser now (but will wait till tomorrow to order as black friday week starts on amazon in 6 hours lol, every little helps) I have one like this, but it is a bit big.
So going to look for a smaller one that I can use when I am out and about.
So going to look for a smaller one that I can use when I am out and about.
Forgive me if this the wrong place to post this, but I’ve got a viltrox ef-m ii speed booster (I think that’s what it’s called without checking). I have mounted a canon 50mm f1.8 on it for use with my Panasonic g80. It works well enough and was curious as to what other lenses I could buy for it. However, I can’t seem to unmount the lens from the adaptor. Does anyone know where I might be going wrong?
- Messages
- 224
- Name
- Ian
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Managed to photograph these Waxwings locally this morning.
G9 + 100-400mm lens
Waxwing (1) by Ian Wilkinson, on Flickr
Waxwing (2) by Ian Wilkinson, on Flickr
My favourite berries! by Ian Wilkinson, on Flickr
G9 + 100-400mm lens
Waxwing (1) by Ian Wilkinson, on FlickrWaxwing (2) by Ian Wilkinson, on FlickrMy favourite berries! by Ian Wilkinson, on Flickr
- Messages
- 248
- Name
- Andrew
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Hi all, I could I please ask a question?, I have the panasonic 14-42 and the 45-150 (both cheap lenses) which are working fine, but if I was to look towards upgrading lenses what would people suggest??. Is the 25mm f1.7 better than 25mm on my 14-42??, I must admit that I am a sod for just putting my lenses at the maximum distance, and would like to try using fixed focal length lens to see if I can break the habbit. I would like the Panasonic 100-300 mk2 for using in my local park as the wildlife is really skittish (due to the kids and dogs chasing them around) but is just beyond my financial reach (even used the cost is not that different to a new one, £499 for new or £400 used from what I have seen). Anyway any recomendations would be appreciated.
woof woof
I like a nice Chianti
- Messages
- 39,685
- Name
- Alan
- Edit My Images
- No
Those zoom lenses are decent kit but if you want better zooms you could take a look at the Panasonic 12-35 and 35-100mm f2.8's. Also the Panasonic 100-400mm is I think generally thought to be better than the 100-300mm but the 100-400mm is known for being a bit stiff in use. Mine is. I also have the 12-35mm f2.8 and I think it's very nice indeed with a handy close focusing ability plus the f2.8 gives you the chance of getting a more FF shallow depth look than you'd get from the non f2.8 zooms.
Prime wise I went for the Oly 17, 25 and 45mm f1.8's but I also have the Panasonic 20mm f1.7 and 14mm f2.5.
I'd happily recommend all of these lenses but the 20mm f1.7 needs thinking about as AFAIK you can't shoot continuously with it, maybe something to do with its focusing system. I could be wrong but I think the 20mm f1.7 is worth reading up on if you are interested.
The Oly 17mm f1.8 is a particularly nice lens as it has a nice metal build and a push/pull manual focus operation with markings.
Good luck choosing Andrew.
Prime wise I went for the Oly 17, 25 and 45mm f1.8's but I also have the Panasonic 20mm f1.7 and 14mm f2.5.
I'd happily recommend all of these lenses but the 20mm f1.7 needs thinking about as AFAIK you can't shoot continuously with it, maybe something to do with its focusing system. I could be wrong but I think the 20mm f1.7 is worth reading up on if you are interested.
The Oly 17mm f1.8 is a particularly nice lens as it has a nice metal build and a push/pull manual focus operation with markings.
Good luck choosing Andrew.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 2,160
- Name
- Steve, Coventry, England
- Edit My Images
- Yes
The 100-300 Mk11 is a good lens, just don't put a filter on it "for protection" You can get them for a lot less if you are patient.
The 100-400 is a superb lens, but 2-3 times as much as the 100-300.
I have them both, and the 100-300 is very light and easy to use, even on a GX9.
I also have the 20mm 1.7, and yes the focus is a bit slower than the other lenses, but it has never been a problem for me. It is very nice indoors and in town, the main way it is better than the zoom set at 20mm id the aperture.
I think the "but the 20mm f1.7 needs thinking about as AFAIK you can shoot continuously with it," above might have been meant to read "you can't shoot continuously with it" as it may not work on continuous auto focus. Doesn't mean that you can't shoot continuously, just that if you do, it does not refocus between each shot.
- Messages
- 248
- Name
- Andrew
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Thanks Sangoma, those "UV" filters I bought are now in a box out of sight lol, seemed like a good idea at the time but have since found out that being "cheap" they could result in a loss of image quality and distortion. Can I ask do people use filters for images of say duck that are on water?, I find the water part of the image looks bright in places and seems to make you focus on that rather than the subject?. hope that makes sense lol.
Woof Woof, thanks for the info, but unfortunately the 100-400 is way out of my price range, I was also thinking of staying with Panasonic, just so that all the IS, IBIS etc works together if I upgrade my camera at some point in the future.
Last edited:
woof woof
I like a nice Chianti
- Messages
- 39,685
- Name
- Alan
- Edit My Images
- No
One little hidden gem (IMO) is the Panasonic 14mm f2.5. Being f2.5 and not particularly good for bokeh or extreme low light shooting may lead to it being overlooked but the positives include 28mm equivalent FoV, the fact that it's tiny, IMO good IQ and nice bokeh when you get some. If a 28mm FoV appeals I think it's well worth a look and it can be found on the used market. I've bought a lot of my MFT kit used.
I've had the 14mm f2.5 welded to my GX80 for quite a while
Mrs WW on Saltburn beach. GX80 and 14mm f2.5.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 2,160
- Name
- Steve, Coventry, England
- Edit My Images
- Yes
In general, I only use 3 filters for ordinary photos, polarised, graduated ND and a yellow/orange for B&W film
woof woof
I like a nice Chianti
- Messages
- 39,685
- Name
- Alan
- Edit My Images
- No
I gave up with filters years ago except for ND's to keep the shutter down. Polarisers can be useful in some situations but can potentially cause issues in others, for example wide angle blue skies.
Other special use filters can be fun and these days some people like the softening effects a diffusion or mist filter can give. I have one on my Fuji X100f.
Other special use filters can be fun and these days some people like the softening effects a diffusion or mist filter can give. I have one on my Fuji X100f.
- Messages
- 248
- Name
- Andrew
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Nice pictures Alan (if I may call you that), all my gear is going to be used lol, need to keep the cost down. As for filters, it is just the glare from water that annoys me lol, makes for bad photos that I cant use, in my humble (and limited knowledge) opinion.
- Messages
- 1,989
- Name
- Sam
- Edit My Images
- Yes
A circular polariser might help you with that. It's the main filter I use for photos, but as Alan said, you have to learn how it works so you can get the best out of it.
woof woof
I like a nice Chianti
- Messages
- 39,685
- Name
- Alan
- Edit My Images
- No
And you also have to learn how not to get a filter stuck on the end of your lens
Of course
- Messages
- 2,514
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- Yes
3 images taken in poor late afternoon light today with G9 & 100-400mm Lieca lens. The Heron was across the river some 30 yards away. Images edited with Faststone.
A little cleaner looking on my laptop than when transferred to the forum.
SS 1/125 - F6.3 - ISO 2000
SS 1/125 - F6.3 - ISO 2500
SS 1/125 - F6.3 - ISO 3200
A little cleaner looking on my laptop than when transferred to the forum.
SS 1/125 - F6.3 - ISO 2000
SS 1/125 - F6.3 - ISO 2500
SS 1/125 - F6.3 - ISO 3200