"Panasonic G series" Owners Thread
- Thread starter hillwalkinggirl
- Start date
Stephen L
I asked a Stupid Question Once...
- Messages
- 7,478
- Name
- Stephen
- Edit My Images
- No
Better than I’ve ever managedI've never been able to get a moon shot I'm happy with. I had a go the other night and got this with my GX9 and 100-400mm. I'm not completely happy but it's possibly the best I've managed to date. 60% crop.
woof woof
I like a nice Chianti
- Messages
- 43,312
- Name
- Alan
- Edit My Images
- No
- Messages
- 2,959
- Name
- Steve, Coventry, England
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I've never been able to get a moon shot I'm happy with. I had a go the other night and got this with my GX9 and 100-400mm. I'm not completely happy but it's possibly the best I've managed to date. 60% crop.
We had a similar object in the sky on Monday morning, same lens too
The sky was clear, but didn't have time to get a tripod out
woof woof
I like a nice Chianti
- Messages
- 43,312
- Name
- Alan
- Edit My Images
- No
I shot hand held.
I've seen much better pictures on line than mine but I think some of it is down to processing so I tried a bit harder with that one above. Also I suppose if the moon is higher in the sky, it was quite low then, there'll be less atmosphere to get in the way. I'll keep trying as a good moon picture is something I've always wanted to take especially when I see what other people have managed.
I've seen much better pictures on line than mine but I think some of it is down to processing so I tried a bit harder with that one above. Also I suppose if the moon is higher in the sky, it was quite low then, there'll be less atmosphere to get in the way. I'll keep trying as a good moon picture is something I've always wanted to take especially when I see what other people have managed.
- Messages
- 2,959
- Name
- Steve, Coventry, England
- Edit My Images
- Yes
It looks OK to me, I looked closer and you have got rid of the noise and still got detail.
I didn't bother as I had wanted to use a tripod and different settings. All I did was desaturate and increase contrast.
I've got to the stage of thinking it won't get much better without a telescope or much longer lens, but I also want to try some HDR stacks when I have the tripod out.
I have a feeling I may get a better detail to noise ratio
woof woof
I like a nice Chianti
- Messages
- 43,312
- Name
- Alan
- Edit My Images
- No
It looks OK to me, I looked closer and you have got rid of the noise and still got detail.
I didn't bother as I had wanted to use a tripod and different settings. All I did was desaturate and increase contrast.
I've got to the stage of thinking it won't get much better without a telescope or much longer lens, but I also want to try some HDR stacks when I have the tripod out.
I have a feeling I may get a better detail to noise ratio
That all sounds a bit complex for me but if you do a really good job I might have to try too
- Messages
- 9,096
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Hey guys, I've got a new PC, yea, very nice. Today I went out with the camera, first time in ages, got back to find this expensive piece of PC has no memory card slot. WTF.
Tried the charging cable, but I don't think that' the answer. So it looks like WiFi.
but I'm not having any luck with that. grrrr
(I could buy one of those little USB plug in card readers).
Tried the charging cable, but I don't think that' the answer. So it looks like WiFi.
but I'm not having any luck with that. grrrr
(I could buy one of those little USB plug in card readers).
woof woof
I like a nice Chianti
- Messages
- 43,312
- Name
- Alan
- Edit My Images
- No
Hey guys, I've got a new PC, yea, very nice. Today I went out with the camera, first time in ages, got back to find this expensive piece of PC has no memory card slot. WTF.
Tried the charging cable, but I don't think that' the answer. So it looks like WiFi.
but I'm not having any luck with that. grrrr
(I could buy one of those little USB plug in card readers).
I just plug the camera into the pc with a usb lead and this does have one advantage as most of my cameras charge up while I'm processing the pictures. I think the GM5 is the only one that doesn't.
- Messages
- 9,096
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Thanks yes did it finally. Had to click on something on camera screen to connect.
woof woof
I like a nice Chianti
- Messages
- 43,312
- Name
- Alan
- Edit My Images
- No
Yes. My Panasonic cameras detect they're plugged into a pc and come up with a little menu and you have to press select. After that the camera shows up a a storage device.
I don't mind doing it this way as the chances are that when I've stopped reviewing and processing the pictures the camera is charged up... but you have to remember to turn the camera off once you've transferred the pictures to the pc otherwise it doesn't charge up.
- Messages
- 34,300
- Name
- George.
- Edit My Images
- No
a bit of sun across the road, thought I'd try some high contrast B&W
GX80+12-60 L.Mono -2EV
"Excellent" candid street style capture David, pushes all the right buttons for me.
- Messages
- 9,096
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Thanks mate. I will now experiment some more ...
- Messages
- 562
- Name
- Derek
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I've been getting frustrated with the G80's tendency to "vanish" birds in flight in continuous focus mode. The camera locks onto a bird, the one, two, three or four red squares appear around it... and then suddenly it disappears. It's just like it doesn't exist, then a moment later it's back. It's very off-putting and it happens every time. Today a big airplane was passing over, high enough that it appeared slow, so I tried focussing on it - which was easy as it was going so slow - and, sure enough, exactly the same thing happens. The camera locks on, or at least puts the red squares around it, and then bang - it disappears. It's genuinely like a magic trick. My assumption is that the camera is searching for the subject and is temporarily locking onto the background (i.e. sky) and as the sky is at infinity the plane disappears. But this plane wasn't even difficult to track - it was so high and slow it was easy. So what gives? Is it just me and my flaky G80? Should I change a setting somewhere?
- Messages
- 9,096
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Green squares is what's needed.
To lock onto a moving subject you need 'AF Tracking'. Try the left cursor button.
- Messages
- 2,959
- Name
- Steve, Coventry, England
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Tried it this morning, not too bad, but reinforces my feelings that to get much better, a longer lens or telescope is needed, as now camera pixels are the limiting factor.That all sounds a bit complex for me but if you do a really good job I might have to try too
I think being able to get a reasonable image is as far as I want to go though.
I have tried other cameras and lenses in the past without any great success, and although far from perfect, I'm happy enough with it.
I did try RAW and could not get near this, so this is just merged jpegs
- Messages
- 15,756
- Name
- Rich
- Edit My Images
- Yes
- Messages
- 15,756
- Name
- Rich
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Definitely a good idea to buy a card reader, the latest ones are very speedy and can be left plugged in.Hey guys, I've got a new PC, yea, very nice. Today I went out with the camera, first time in ages, got back to find this expensive piece of PC has no memory card slot. WTF.
Tried the charging cable, but I don't think that' the answer. So it looks like WiFi.
but I'm not having any luck with that. grrrr
(I could buy one of those little USB plug in card readers).
Saves messing about with leads and eliminates the danger of the camera falling off the desk/table.
- Messages
- 562
- Name
- Derek
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Tried the AF tracking this morning, not sure I gave it enough time, so will practice more, but I am getting the same issue still - and with green boxes. I did see one YT video where a chap said he experienced this on a G9 when the target was distant (as are all mine when this happens) so maybe it's a Panasonic thing.Green squares is what's needed.
To lock onto a moving subject you need 'AF Tracking'. Try the left cursor button.
- Messages
- 9,096
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I've never used Tracking much; I tend to avoid things that move. Something like a plane in the sky, I use Single Point.
- Messages
- 9,096
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Yeah, think I will get one.
- Messages
- 562
- Name
- Derek
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I rose nice and early this morning to watch the MotoGP race, and afterwards thought why waste the dawn? So I wandered down to the canal where it was very dark, although later it was light. All taken on the G80 with the 100-300, save for the first one which was the 12-35.
- Messages
- 2,959
- Name
- Steve, Coventry, England
- Edit My Images
- Yes
First three are full frame, next two are aimed a video, and the rest are "lower end" or more "compact" than the G9
Looks like it is more a pointer of the market than the quality of the camera, many users of the G9 I imagine would now have gone to the full frame (I will if I win the lotto
)- Messages
- 12,048
- Edit My Images
- No
A bit odd that. Perhaps they felt it was a bit "too professional"? It's certainly a big boy, compared to some other Panasonic cameras...
Last edited:
- Messages
- 15,756
- Name
- Rich
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I looked at the Panasonic FF when they first came out and again when the S5 was comparatively cheap.First three are full frame, next two are aimed a video, and the rest are "lower end" or more "compact" than the G9
Looks like it is more a pointer of the market than the quality of the camera, many users of the G9 I imagine would now have gone to the full frame (I will if I win the lotto
As with all the larger sensor cameras the lenses are like for like bigger and heavier.
Also I would go for a more evolved system, probably Sony, so its carry on with the G9 and GX9 for me.
Stephen L
I asked a Stupid Question Once...
- Messages
- 7,478
- Name
- Stephen
- Edit My Images
- No
I like the ergonomics of my G9, and am happy with m4/3, but with my current shoulder problems I am finding it just too heavy and bulky. So I am investing in an Olympus E-M5 III to initially run alongside it. I had the original E-M5 when it first came out. I'm afraid the smaller Panasonics just don't "do it" for me, except the LX100. And no, I've not noticed any dust issues. I've not gone looking for them but they don't appear on any of my photos.
woof woof
I like a nice Chianti
- Messages
- 43,312
- Name
- Alan
- Edit My Images
- No
I'd like to see a new GM5 but better made and without the contamination under the glass issue. IMO there's no need to chase mega pixels though. One thing I do like about the GM5 is that I can carry it all day in the palm of my hand and to other people it's just about invisible. I'd also like to see a really well made and really well sealed LX100 with a much better EVF. Two things disappointed me when I very briefly owned one, the fact that the sensor was a blizzard of contamination and the IMO poor evf. Solve those two issues and I'd very possibly buy a premium priced one.
Oh, and I'd give the G100 a second top of camera control. I used mine again yesterday and I'll never adjust to the handling of it as it is.
Having said all that if Sony get their act together and fix the many issues the A7c has for me I might be persuaded to leave MFT behind.
Oh, and I'd give the G100 a second top of camera control. I used mine again yesterday and I'll never adjust to the handling of it as it is.
Having said all that if Sony get their act together and fix the many issues the A7c has for me I might be persuaded to leave MFT behind.
badlywornroy
I am not macho
- Messages
- 2,707
- Name
- Roy
- Edit My Images
- No
It's all 'Bollards' to me !
Pan G90 + 12-60mm Lumix
Pan G90 + 12-60mm Lumix
- Messages
- 34,300
- Name
- George.
- Edit My Images
- No
It's all 'Bollards' to me !
Pan G90 + 12-60mm Lumix
Nice capture Roy, the composition works really well.
badlywornroy
I am not macho
- Messages
- 2,707
- Name
- Roy
- Edit My Images
- No
Thank you George, It is relatively easy getting down low for these type of shots but getting back up is a b****r
- Messages
- 9,096
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- Yes
seen this advertised locally:
Selling it as a bundle with camera + two lenses - regular and for macro photography.
The "regular" is Lumix 20mm (she describes it as a "LUMIX 0.2m-0.66ft lens")
And the "Macro" set-up is a MMF-2 adapter on a 70-300mm. Caps, pouch & charger.
Is that any good for macro, will it AF, stabilisation??
And what's it worth? I was initially thinking of offering £50 or less for the 20mm only.
Selling it as a bundle with camera + two lenses - regular and for macro photography.
The "regular" is Lumix 20mm (she describes it as a "LUMIX 0.2m-0.66ft lens")
And the "Macro" set-up is a MMF-2 adapter on a 70-300mm. Caps, pouch & charger.
Is that any good for macro, will it AF, stabilisation??
And what's it worth? I was initially thinking of offering £50 or less for the 20mm only.
Last edited:
Stephen L
I asked a Stupid Question Once...
- Messages
- 7,478
- Name
- Stephen
- Edit My Images
- No
The GF1 dates back to 2009, and was good for its time. Body only these days possibly £50 for an excellent one. The 20mm Panasonic is probably a Mk1 - a very good lens maybe worth £100. The zoom lens is a regular 4/3 mount, hence the MMF2, and maybe worth £30. MMF2 perhaps £20. No autofocus. No macro. No stabilisation.seen this advertised locally:
Selling it as a bundle with camera + two lenses - regular and for macro photography.
The "regular" is Lumix 20mm (she describes it as a "LUMIX 0.2m-0.66ft lens")
And the "Macro" set-up is a MMF-2 adapter on a 70-300mm. Caps, pouch & charger.
Is that any good for macro, will it AF, stabilisation??
And what's it worth? I was initially thinking of offering £50 or less for the 20mm only.
Sounds like the seller hasn't got a clue so you may well get it for £50 - if you really want it.
Last edited:
woof woof
I like a nice Chianti
- Messages
- 43,312
- Name
- Alan
- Edit My Images
- No
I agree with Stephen on the prices.
I had the GF1. It was my 1st MFT camera. I think the IQ is ok and useable up to the max ISO which I think is 1,600 with extended 3,200? I forget. There'll be noise but it's useable with care and processing. I've had MK1 and MK2 20mm's and didn't see any difference between them. I do think it's a nice lens but it is slow to focus and AFAIK doesn't allow continuous focusing.
The main thing with the GF1 which I couldn't live with is the lack of a vf.
Oh, PS.
Another thing with the GF1 and 20mm f1.7 combination. For some strange reason the 20mm can give noise banding at high ISO's. I've no idea why this should be caused by a lens but I did see it with my G1 and 20mm. I can't remember seeing it on a more modern body but if the G1 and 20mm were affected the chances are that the GF1 and 20mm will show it too.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 15,756
- Name
- Rich
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Someone is flogging the same adapter for over a 100 quid in the classifieds
Reckon one of you has got the price a bit wrong
https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/threads/olympus-mmf-2-adaptor.742978/
Last edited:
Stephen L
I asked a Stupid Question Once...
- Messages
- 7,478
- Name
- Stephen
- Edit My Images
- No
Sorry. PS I was wrong about autofocus, but it will be leisurely on the 4/3 zoom lens. The market for the MMF2 is dwindling, so it’s worth what someone would pay for it.
Last edited: