"Panasonic G series" Owners Thread

Messages
3,240
Name
Wez
Edit My Images
Yes
That's an interesting question and I'd like to hear what others think. I have a sneaking suspicion that making the focus point as small as possible may not be the best thing to do for some subjects as maybe the smallest point may not give the system enough to lock on to. I've been through this with both my MFT cameras and my A7 and my suspicion is that for me not having the point at it's smallest works best but this could also be subject and lighting / contrast dependant.

Off to Thailand? My wife is from Chonburi, where are you going? Been before? Hope you have a good time and I can't see how you wouldn't as it's a fantastic place :D
Thanks Alan, I'll try that out with regards to the focus point (y)

Second time I'll have been. Went for a week last October but going for two weeks this time, as one week was nowhere near long enough! Starting in Bangkok for a couple of days, then near Pattaya for a few days, then down to Krabi for the rest. Can't wait, it looks beautiful!

:)
 
Messages
19,967
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
Thanks Alan, I'll try that out with regards to the focus point (y)

Second time I'll have been. Went for a week last October but going for two weeks this time, as one week was nowhere near long enough! Starting in Bangkok for a couple of days, then near Pattaya for a few days, then down to Krabi for the rest. Can't wait, it looks beautiful!

:)
My Mrs family home is not far from Pattaya. I'm sure you'll have a good time but one problem is that there's just too much to see and do :D

I like the fact that you can eat out twice a day at different places and never run out of places to go and I've never seen anything like their little coffee and milk shake stops anywhere else. If it wasn't for the heat and humidity which I can't take I'd love the place even more. Actually my Mrs is there for a month at the mo and after living in the UK she's now having problems coping with the heat back home :D

Good luck with the focus, I'm sure you'll quickly work out what works best for you.
 
Messages
19,967
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
What ISO do you guys tend to max out at? I'm thinking I'll probably use ISO 1600 as a ceiling at the start?
I'll use any up to and including 25,600 as IMO taking a shot is better than not taking it. I've found that 25,600 is usually useable for whole picture viewing and reasonably sized prints. If you want pixel peeping perfection then I suppose you'll have to set a limit and just not take some shots.

Actually I've found that the biggest image quality hit isn't necessarily the extreme ISO's but some artificial lighting.

I posted an ISO 16,000 shot a few pages ago, looks ok to me with next to no processing as do lower light lower shutter speed higher ISO shots.

s1-P1010803-1.jpg
 
Messages
11,200
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
It really depends on the image for me. For macro I won't go above 200 - obviously I use off camera flash so no need to! For garden birds I really don't like losing any feather detail, and if you introduce NR in post, that is exactly what happens, so I prefer to remain below 1600, less whenever it can be done. For street/night shooting, I care much less, sometimes a bit of noise can enhance an image.
 
Messages
19,967
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
No offence to anyone but I'm always a little phased by this debate. If an ISO higher than ideal is required (you can't always stay at ISO 200-400 for shutter speed reasons at least) your options are to take the picture accepting that it's not going to be gallery quality or not take it at all and faced with those choices I'll take the shot every single time :D The shot may not be something you'll want to pixel peep, hang on the wall at A3 or even at the extreme you may not want to show it to other people who'd judge you by it but I think there are more important things than that.
 
Messages
11,200
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
No offence to anyone but I'm always a little phased by this debate. If an ISO higher than ideal is required (you can't always stay at ISO 200-400 for shutter speed reasons at least) your options are to take the picture accepting that it's not going to be gallery quality or not take it at all and faced with those choices I'll take the shot every single time :D The shot may not be something you'll want to pixel peep, hang on the wall at A3 or even at the extreme you may not want to show it to other people who'd judge you by it but I think there are more important things than that.

There's also the other way of looking at it. I just don't shoot in situations where I need anything higher than 1600 for the most part, so doing it for the sake of it would be silly .... If you can get a good exposure without having to rely on higher ISO, then take that route first! I've seen people post ISO 3200 images and make a point of it, when you check the exif data they were using a stupidly high shutter speed or they were stopped down into diffraction zone - ISO should be the last thing you boost. I shoot manual mode always, and doing this over many years has me gauging the exposure of a scene before I even turn the camera on. I'm rarely very far out.
 
Last edited:
Messages
7,114
Name
Jeff
Edit My Images
No
Had this debate with my lad this morning ,my findings so far with the g80 and 100-400 using a.v and auto iso tend to point to the camera mainly choosing a shutter speed of 1/640th sec which is to slow for moving subjects in most cases . So for some reason I tend now to shoot in manual and dictate the shutter speed and aperture myself with a floating auto I.s.o .
This is not the way I have ever done things but it does tend to give overall more consistent good results with this rig under various situations .so far in the 5 weeks of ownership I have yet to come across a situation where noise has been a problem .out of focus or soft images from to slow a shutter speed yes they have caused me problems so I wii re-iterate for whatever reason this lens needs a higher than normal shutter speed .of course I migh be spouting total b*****ks but that’s my feelings
 
Last edited:
Messages
3,502
Name
mike
Edit My Images
Yes
ISO is not a one size fits all, its highly likley this will be my last birding year with a lens like the 100-400 (unless things change for the better) sometimes i look through the lens at 400 mm and nothing i do can stop the image moving up and down, high shutter speed IS still dont get sharp detailed images, i cant use a tripod or monopod as the extra weight would be impossible for me.
If you have a desire to continue as long as possible you do what you can, move to lighter gear, raise the ISO to get higher shutter speeds just to try and not lose a lifetimes hobby.
 
Messages
19,967
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
There's also the other way of looking at it. I just don't shoot in situations where I need anything higher than 1600 for the most part, so doing it for the sake of it would be silly .... If you can get a good exposure without having to rely on higher ISO, then take that route first! I've seen people post ISO 3200 images and make a point of it, when you check the exif data they were using a stupidly high shutter speed or they were stopped down into diffraction zone - ISO should be the last thing you boost. I shoot manual mode always, and doing this over many years has me gauging the exposure of a scene before I even turn the camera on. I'm rarely very far out.
Well, yes. I'd only use an appropriate ISO/shutter speed. I don't use high ISO for the sake of it but sometimes the subject and light dictate it. I too have seen people on the net post pictures taken at higher ISO's at high shutter speeds and I think that's how DPR do it in their test scenes but IMO that's a poor indicator of sensor performance as who cares what a still life picture looks like at ISO 25,600 and 1/4000 as I'm never going to use those settings.

I could have taken that squirrel shot at ISO 200 but he'd have been a blur so I chose what I thought was an appropriate shutter speed and at the lenses widest aperture (f5.6) ISO 16k was the result. At other times I'll take pictures at ISO's into the thousands with a prime lens at f1.8 and shutter speeds between 1/20 and 1/250 but for me there's no point using double digit or even low three digit speeds (such as 1/100) for shots of animals or people or anything else that's likely to move.

I suppose there has to be a quick mental debate to decide the balance between movement blur and high ISO image degradation but mostly for me higher ISO's even at the expense of the loss of fine detail when viewing closely is probably going to be preferable to having obvious movement blur.

Sorry for going on about this but as I said, I'm always a bit phased by the discussion of what the highest ISO should be. I would however agree with a debate regarding what the highest ISO giving good image quality is :D and for subjects like birds where you want to retain feather detail I'd agree that ISO's into the thousands probably aren't going to cut it but for other things including for example people shots which are going to be viewed as whole images rather than pixel peeped I'd say set the ISO to use the max if required and just go for it :D If the result is truly awful you can always bin it later.
 
Last edited:
Messages
8,563
Name
Robert
Edit My Images
Yes
There's also the other way of looking at it. I just don't shoot in situations where I need anything higher than 1600 for the most part, so doing it for the sake of it would be silly .... If you can get a good exposure without having to rely on higher ISO, then take that route first! I've seen people post ISO 3200 images and make a point of it, when you check the exif data they were using a stupidly high shutter speed or they were stopped down into diffraction zone - ISO should be the last thing you boost. I shoot manual mode always, and doing this over many years has me gauging the exposure of a scene before I even turn the camera on. I'm rarely very far out.
When I used my D7000 and sigma 150-600 i'd rarely go over 1600, and usually avoided it unless I was desperate to get the shot.
I have no such issues/concerns with my G80 and 100-400.
Having said that, I'm not one for putting my camera away because the conditions aren't perfect. I've got lots of images that mean a lot to me that are far from perfect noise wise, but ive got them, and kept them.
I dont/wouldn't keep an out of focus shot though.
 
Messages
11,200
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
I don't think I have ever use Auto ISO, I don't trust any camera to select settings for me, just the way I've always been. Whatever suits you, do it! But for me 99% of the time I don't have any actual need to raise my ISO. If I returned to shooting gigs like I did when I was more physically capable! I would no doubt be pushing harder, but until I need to, I wont.

I'm not missing any shots btw, and a rainy day has never stopped me either

I should add though, as I've noticed some find slower shutter speeds tricky, I have pretty solid hands, no shakes, and find slower speeds such as 1/20th with shorter lenses or 1/50th with longer lenses no problem [I have managed sharp 1" images hand held, but they would be rare, in general, slower SS doesn't bother me at all] And most of what i shoot would be still life or very slow moving, I make use of the IBIS to keep the ISO down pretty much. It was the main reason I moved to M43. If the cheaper Fuji bodies had it, I probably never would have switched
 
Last edited:
Messages
7,114
Name
Jeff
Edit My Images
No
as I said earlier noise so far has not been a issue for me ,the g80 seems to turn out highly detailed shots ,the ones I have fluffed up have been through to slow a shutter speed leading to image blur /shake /o.o.f call it what you will .I mainly changed due to advancing years and find that even with i.b.i.s its still difficult to hand hold so I now use a sirui monopod and a lightweight jobu jr. gimbal .I really want to explore the video capability of this camera soon to
 
Messages
11,200
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
I find the IBIS amazing, it's really good for video too, though I rarely make use of that. Even when using faster SS the IBIS helps a lot, as it steadies the preview in the VF or on the LCD. I have an old 200mm F4 lens that was always tricky to focus with steadily on my Fuji cameras. I've used it on the em5 and G80, where it gives a longer FF equiv focal length, and it's much, much easier to compose with. I've even used it for a bit of video


Nothing very technical here, just through the window bird footage using that old Takumar 200 F4 [note the reflections] It was the first time I used the G80 video. All hand held
 
Last edited:
Messages
7,114
Name
Jeff
Edit My Images
No
nicely done indeed Keith ,something I have yet to try, i had a super 135mm f2.8 lens I gave my grandson for his Panasonic ,a couple of years ago must look for another one
 
Messages
3,240
Name
Wez
Edit My Images
Yes
Been in the garden for the last hour, taking photos of the birds on the feeders.

One thing I've noticed :

How do I stop the EVF from autofocusing when I put my eye to it? I wondered why it kept refocusing and thought that I'd had my finger on the half press but no, I realised the EVF autofocused when I raised it to my eye!

Anyone know how to turn this feature off please, as I couldn't find it in the menu?

Thanks,
Wez
 
Messages
3,502
Name
mike
Edit My Images
Yes
Ime out of date now with panny but have you got the lcd touch focus on, so you focus with your nose:)
 
Messages
7,114
Name
Jeff
Edit My Images
No
been out for a bit of practise this afternoon on gulls to see if my b.i.f tech has improved before trotting off to bempton next week ,this is the worst of 3 the other two were blue skies and spot on ,so nearly there ,handheld to ,all point focus still haven't hit on this is my best method but it will come ,shortage of birds isn't helping either ,and I live 2 minutes from the sea, no bloody gulls
practise ,practise,practise
by jeff and jan cohen, on Flickr
 
Messages
3,240
Name
Wez
Edit My Images
Yes
if its a g80 its in the menu under eye focus
Thank you Jeff (y) Yup it is a G80 btw. Very happy with the IQ

Ime out of date now with panny but have you got the lcd touch focus on, so you focus with your nose:)
Haha I thought that at first as I remember that further back in the thread, but it did it when I covered the eye sensor with my finger too ;)
 
Messages
586
Edit My Images
No
Waiting patiently for the postman to deliver my "new" battery grip for the G80. Much as I like the camera, I didn't find it particularly comfortable to hold when using it for a full day at Silverstone last year. Previous to this, I had been using Canon DSLRs (50d/70d/80d). Am very much hoping that the grip will change the feel of the G80 to the point where I can stop all the nonsense of thinking I must upgrade to the G9. Fingers crossed!
 
Messages
11,200
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
Waiting patiently for the postman to deliver my "new" battery grip for the G80. Much as I like the camera, I didn't find it particularly comfortable to hold when using it for a full day at Silverstone last year. Previous to this, I had been using Canon DSLRs (50d/70d/80d). Am very much hoping that the grip will change the feel of the G80 to the point where I can stop all the nonsense of thinking I must upgrade to the G9. Fingers crossed!
The grip makes it feel a lot heftier, I had one and liked it, but sold it on as after a while my wrist would get tired just like it used to with my old D800E [I suffer nerve pain around joints stemming from a back injury] - I might get another for occasional use, there's third party ones out there now for about £40

I've just picked up a GM5 to go with my G1 and GX80. I can't believe how tiny it is! Totally pocketable with a body cap lens, and still compact enough with a 12-32 or 17mm 2.8 :)
The Gm5 is a bit of a cult classic, people still pay ridiculous money for them [as much or more than a new GX80 in some cases, if mint]
 
Last edited:
Messages
135
Name
Gavin
Edit My Images
No
The Gm5 is a bit of a cult classic, people still pay ridiculous money for them [as much or more than a new GX80 in some cases, if mint]
I paid £234 for mine from mpb, which was a bit less than I paid for the GX80! And a lot less than some of the prices I've seen on eBay :eek:
 
Messages
11,200
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
I paid £234 for mine from mpb, which was a bit less than I paid for the GX80! And a lot less than some of the prices I've seen on eBay :eek:
I've seen them go for around £400. They have great re-sale value, you will always guarantee to get at least what you paid back. I don't get the hype over that particular model, but I always prefer chunkier bodies with a bit of grip, the G80 is fine for me, the G9 would be ideal if I could afford it. But ... I can see the attraction of pocket-able options
 
Messages
11,200
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
First time I've come across a ball of baby spiders springing to life! they had just started springing out from their ball when I found them, they shot in every direction in panic when I got close but I managed a few close ups of them, this was about the most detailed

Baby weavers
by K G, on Flickr

Pulled back a little to fit more in

Baby arachnids gone wild!
by K G, on Flickr

5 minutes later and only 10 feet away, I found the polar opposite, this lone beetle casually strolling across the glass table, admiring his own reflection as he went about his business :D

Smooth Oasis
by K G, on Flickr

Such diversity in the macro world when you keep searching
 
Last edited:
Top