"Panasonic G series" Owners Thread

Cagey75 said:
Lovely lighting, and great perspective too. So much detail, I can read the phone number on the van on the lower let when viewed large on Flickr. The bridge looks like it goes on to infinity! That is some combination, G9 with the 8-18!
Click to expand...

Cheers Keith :).

The combination of G9 + 8-18mm is certainly a strong one. The detail in the full size raw file is terrific. As I’ve said before, the G9 is probably the best all round camera that I’ve had the pleasure of owning.

Cheers,

Simon.
 
a difficult one , incoming heron combined with long marsh grass blowing in the wind always makes a/f difficult whatever camera system you use . the g80 handled it well in my book

touchdown by jeff and jan cohen, on Flickr
 
This is the sort of thing that can easily lead to a perfectly in focus and sharp piece of grass and a soft subject and a bit of confusion when you first see it on screen.
 
Photo of no particular merit other than you don't often see the North Sea this blue, pier at Cromer yesterday 27/09/18
Temperature was a rather pleasant 22c, not bad at all for late September on the East coast

Blue.jpg
 
The G7 arrived yesterday, but so did a lovely night for taking the motorbike out for a good thrashing, so I did not get chance to try it until this evening. Shot everything in P mode just to see how it coped and because I hope the misses will use this camera. I have shot in raw to see what could be pulled out, nothing special just tried some difficult exposure for the camera to cope with. Was pleasantly surprised with how well it coped the only shot was really disapointed with was the flower shot, not sure what is going on there, it shot at 200iso 1/8 second f5.6 for some reason. Really pleased with the way the camera handles the articulating screen is great and I prefer the 14-42 to the 12-32 on my GX80.

First G7-1-2.jpg First G7-3.jpg
 
First G7-5.jpg
 

Attachments

  • First G7-6.jpg
    First G7-6.jpg
    390.3 KB · Views: 7
First G7-1-3.jpg First G7-1-4.jpg
 
Last edited:
Bearair said:
Was pleasantly surprised with how well it coped the only shot was really disapointed with was the flower shot, not sure what is going on there, it shot at 200iso 1/8 second f5.6 for some reason.
Click to expand...

This is why I never really trust auto modes, the only one I use is Aperture priority, seems to be at least reliable-ish combined with exp comp
 
Cagey75 said:
This is why I never really trust auto modes, the only one I use is Aperture priority, seems to be at least reliable-ish combined with exp comp
Click to expand...
That is what I nearly always shoot in AP or SP just thought it would be an interesting exercise to see how well it coped. Doubt I will ever use it again!
 
Last edited:
the above three shots show start middle and end of a burst sequence of shots
 
I have a question for the G9 owners.....

Both my Olympus camera’s have a great shutter button, depress half way to attain focus and then press to take the picture. Now my question, my G9 has such a sentive Shutter button that as I try to half press the photo is taken.
Do any of you have the same issue, is there something I can change? This is putting me off the camera...
 
If it’s similar in menu to the g80 Andy and I would think it is , then it’s in the menu system somewhere seek and ye shall find
 
Gandalf said:
I have a question for the G9 owners.....

Both my Olympus camera’s have a great shutter button, depress half way to attain focus and then press to take the picture. Now my question, my G9 has such a sentive Shutter button that as I try to half press the photo is taken.
Do any of you have the same issue, is there something I can change? This is putting me off the camera...
Click to expand...

Mine is the same Andy, but I’m so used to it now after 9 months of ownership, that its sensitivity is rarely a problem And I can half press without taking a photo. You could set the camera up to back button focus though if it’s a major issue for you.

There isn’t any many option or custom function that reduces the shutter buttons sensitivity I’m afraid. At least not that I’ve found as yet!

Simon.
 
Last edited:
I watched some reviews on the G9 that showed how sensitive the shutter action was. They all said the same, that you get used to it after a couple days. The G80 shutter is sweet, it's not quite as sensitive so it's easy half press and hold it there without taking a shot.
 
Anyone ever used a Meyer-Optik Gorlitz Oreston 1.8/50mm Lens, just seen some pictures taken with one on a sony a99 bokah was great, anyone tried one on a G series or any MFT?
 
Not that particular lens ,but I have a ever growing collection of legacy glass I use on both the g80 and omd10 , the majority of legacy glass seems to work better on MFT ,probably because your using more of the centre of the glass . One of my lenses is a Nikon 50mm f1.4 a.i.s and is razor sharp , the Helios 44m gives good bokah to
 
Last edited:
the black fox said:
Not that particular lens ,but I have a ever growing collection of legacy glass I use on both the g80 and omd10 , the majority of legacy glass seems to work better on MFT ,probably because your using more of the centre of the glass . One of my lenses is a Nikon 50mm f1.4 a.i.s and is razor sharp , the Helios 44m gives good bokah to
Click to expand...
Thanks I had good results in the past with OM lenses on the GX80 think I will take a punt on one at £35 there is not much to lose and I love the bubble bokah, although I know others hate it.
 
The way I view vintage lenses is if you only ever get a handful of decent shots using it, it's already paid for itself. You've nothing to lose really
 
the black fox said:
Not that particular lens ,but I have a ever growing collection of legacy glass I use on both the g80 and omd10 , the majority of legacy glass seems to work better on MFT ,probably because your using more of the centre of the glass . One of my lenses is a Nikon 50mm f1.4 a.i.s and is razor sharp , the Helios 44m gives good bokah to
Click to expand...

Gotta disagree with this as my experience is exactly the opposite.

When you use old FF lenses on MFT yes you're only using the central part of the image and that's going to be the best bit but you're also magnifying it more which will impact on image quality as the more the magnification the bigger the hit to image quality.

My experience has been that legacy lenses are good to pretty average to relatively poor performers on MFT and are usually soundly thrashed by a good native lens. I haven't found a legacy lens yet that beats the Olympus primes I have and actually not my Panasonic zooms either for image quality. Bokeh and image character are another issue and I'm just looking at sharpness, lack of aberrations etc and other purely image quality stuff rather than subjective "look" stuff. I've found that my legacy lenses perform much better on my FF Sony A7 which is how it should be as the larger the sensor the less magnification needed and consequently the image quality should suffer less. Yes with FF you're using more/all of the image circle and that'll include the less good edges and corners where you may get softness, smearing, vignetting and any other nasties but you're magnifying the image less and unless the edges and corners are dire to the point that they ruin the picture you should still end up with a "better" final image.

On FF my some of my legacy lenses are good stopped down to the point that it probably doesn't matter that they're old lenses. Some others are dual personality lenses in that they're funky and characterful wide open and just nice old lenses when stopped down but none of them can match a good modern lens for across the frame image quality and that's pretty much how you'd expect it to be as things have moved on now with better and more complex designs to limit optical issues, more specialist glass and much better coatings and better manufacturing. For example my old 50mm lenses can look very nice in isolation but compared to my Sony 55mm f1.8, which is an absolutely outstanding lens, they're absolutely thrashed for across the frame image quality especially at wide apertures.
 
Last edited:
Just my t'uppence: Vintage lenses aren't really for pixel peeping, I'm not looking for outstanding sharpness when using them. I use them for a bit of fun, a different look to the overly clinical at times modern lenses. Some of them are actually better because they're not so critically sharp.

This place [gear forum, not this thread] has gotten so dreary and boring lately with 90% of the discussion about over-priced gear that's not even out yet. I think many on here just plain forget that for most of us, photography is just a fun hobby, we are image makers, artists even, not bone surgeons. We don't need to approach everything with a microscope and scalpel. Who cares if these old lenses are sharper on FF? Not me. Not when you're probably cropping out the smudgey corners on a lot of shots, bugger all difference then.
 
Just happened to use a vintage lens the other day, only uploaded today. One from the Canon FD 50mm f/3.5 - don't see how being sharper would matter for an image like this:

Calm by K G, on Flickr

And one from the 15 PL

Kaval by K G, on Flickr
 
Cagey75 said:
Just my t'uppence: Vintage lenses aren't really for pixel peeping, I'm not looking for outstanding sharpness when using them. I use them for a bit of fun, a different look to the overly clinical at times modern lenses. Some of them are actually better because they're not so critically sharp.

This place [gear forum, not this thread] has gotten so dreary and boring lately with 90% of the discussion about over-priced gear that's not even out yet. I think many on here just plain forget that for most of us, photography is just a fun hobby, we are image makers, artists even, not bone surgeons. We don't need to approach everything with a microscope and scalpel. Who cares if these old lenses are sharper on FF? Not me. Not when you're probably cropping out the smudgey corners on a lot of shots, bugger all difference then.
Click to expand...

Deep sigh, you may not care but I think it's important to be well informed and to make informed decisions.

I use legacy lenses for a few reasons, they're nice to use, they're often cheap and they are sometimes characterful but I rarely if ever use them because they're technically better than native lenses. I do agree that legacy lenses can give a very different look to modern lenses and that's partly how and why I use them but lets not pretend they're technically as good as a good modern lens as the chances are that they're not. It does make me smile a little when people miss the point a bit on how a picture looks and some can tend to look at pictures with too much of a technical eye which is why I tend to ignore some of the criticism of some of my old lens pictures in the Sony thread :D

And yes the tech stuff can get boring but this is a gear forum and there are plenty of picture threads.
 
Summot went wrong with this post so see below.
 

Attachments

  • clear[1].png
    clear[1].png
    137 bytes · Views: 9
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
Just happened to use a vintage lens the other day, only uploaded today. One from the Canon FD 50mm f/3.5 - don't see how being sharper would matter for an image like this:
Click to expand...

I'm happy for you.

You've missed my point and why I replied above but such is life on forums, I've posted twice on this now and that's enough ;)
 
woof woof said:
Deep sigh, you may not care but I think it's important to be well informed and to make informed decisions.

I use legacy lenses for a few reasons, they're nice to use, they're often cheap and they are sometimes characterful but I rarely if ever use them because they're technically better than native lenses. I do agree that legacy lenses can give a very different look to modern lenses and that's partly how and why I use them but lets not pretend they're technically as good as a good modern lens as the chances are that they're not. It does make me smile a little when people miss the point a bit on how a picture looks and some can tend to look at pictures with too much of a technical eye which is why I tend to ignore some of the criticism of some of my old lens pictures in the Sony thread :D

And yes the tech stuff can get boring but this is a gear forum and there are plenty of picture threads.
Click to expand...

What are you sighing for? seems like you're doing your usual try-harding to create an argument out of nothing. Did you even read my post? Seems not so much, as I didn't say any such thing

Cagey75 said:
Just my t'uppence: Vintage lenses aren't really for pixel peeping, I'm not looking for outstanding sharpness when using them. I use them for a bit of fun, a different look to the overly clinical at times modern lenses. Some of them are actually better because they're not so critically sharp.
Click to expand...
woof woof said:
but lets not pretend they're technically as good as a good modern lens as the chances are that they're not. It does make me smile a little when people miss the point
Click to expand...

For starters it wasn't aimed at you or I would have quoted, I'm not shy about letting anyone know I'm using them as an example as you well know. I'm tired of a bunch of you in the other threads going around in circles, same handful everytime, and I wouldn't be surprised one bit if it put newcomers right off. Only point I made here is vintage lenses are not bought for their sharp qualities, I don't really give a damn which cameras they work best on, I'm only going to be using them on the one I own so that is all that matters to me.

This is a Panasonic thread, can we keep it to that? Gear talk or images, there's a reason for the thread title. Save the silly arguments for the Sony thread, you've been asked nicely before. You seem to be the one missing the point, nobody in here cares about FF or they'd be shooting it.
 
Last edited:
Just bought the 75-300 on cash back and got an extra £29 off as the box was damaged, after cash back that makes it £255, not the sharpest lens and looks like it will be a bit slow focusing but i feel i will have a use for it, first samples are from very poor light apart from the flower where the light was a bit better.

All at 300mm

PA020074.jpg

PA020080.jpg

PA020090.jpg

PA020115c.jpg

PA020177c.jpg
 
mikew said:
Just bought the 75-300 on cash back and got an extra £29 off as the box was damaged, after cash back that makes it £255, not the sharpest lens and looks like it will be a bit slow focusing but i feel i will have a use for it, first samples are from very poor light apart from the flower where the light was a bit better.

All at 300mm

View attachment 135714

View attachment 135715

View attachment 135716

View attachment 135717

View attachment 135718
Click to expand...

Seems good enough! I went for the 100-300 Panasonic and was very happy with that. Seems to resolve detail very good!
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
Hold up 'till I get me magnifying glass to check details :D
Click to expand...
you had to make me do it Keith , the main words on the sign say " castle for a king as hard as flint " perfectly legible in the original at 100% which to me is even more amazing . . its a new sign and I have never read it not often I go into the castle
 
Update - the Viktox EF m2 is a gem! It’s amazing on the 200mm 2.8 and the 100-400! AF is as fast as the M50 I reckon! Result soo, no time yet! M1.. is a pile of poop. Unless I got a bad one! Always flashing up lens error and then focu error and failing to do anything..

Now to decide.. do I still keep the Lumix X lens I’ve just bought? 12-35 2.8 and 35-100 2.8... [emoji57][emoji57][emoji57]
 
So... is this now the end of Canon M for me? Do I strictly have any need for the M50 (despite me loving the bloody little thing as it is sweet to use) since ALL my decent canon glass works seamlessly on the G80!!!
 
stickytape said:
Update - the Viktox EF m2 is a gem! It’s amazing on the 200mm 2.8 and the 100-400! AF is as fast as the M50 I reckon! Result soo, no time yet! M1.. is a pile of poop. Unless I got a bad one! Always flashing up lens error and then focu error and failing to do anything..

Now to decide.. do I still keep the Lumix X lens I’ve just bought? 12-35 2.8 and 35-100 2.8... [emoji57][emoji57][emoji57]
Click to expand...


I wouldn't mind trying the Viltrox ef-M1 if you're getting rid :p

Also, don't suppose you'd trade the 12-35 for a Pana-Leica 15mm prime? with cash of course, ponder on it a least, I like the look of that lens

Still pondering here overall on whether to switch back to Fuji or stick with the G80 for now - nobody seems to want to buy it anyway
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
I wouldn't mind trying the Viltrox ef-M1 if you're getting rid :p

Also, don't suppose you'd trade the 12-35 for a Pana-Leica 15mm prime? with cash of course, ponder on it a least, I like the look of that lens

Still pondering here overall on whether to switch back to Fuji or stick with the G80 for now - nobody seems to want to buy it anyway
Click to expand...

I think I would just send it back I'm afraid! alas, I've just bought the Leica 25mm prime so no need! I will be getting rid of the kit 12-60 but I know thats not quite in the same league! Hmm well I really like the G80! I just need to convince myself I don't need or notice the extra sensor size on the m50 for me to get rid of the M50 and then gradually eradicate the EFS lens I have and be sole Panasonic!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top