"Panasonic G series" Owners Thread

BenXiaoHai said:
How does the GX8 compare to the older GH4? I shoot more stills and was wondering if the sensor in the GX8 is "better"?
Click to expand...
From the tests I've seen there's very little difference in the sensors, other than 12% more (linear) resolution for the GX8 (which is practically irrelevant IMHO).
 
Just bought a refurb'd G7 with 14-42 mk2 for £350 from Panasonics eBay store, there's two left at the moment. I missed the double cashback deal, which I think equalled that price. My old G6 has been my favourite camera I've ever bought and the longest I've ever had a camera, the only two issues I had were blown highlights and noise on long exposures. When I got my E-M10 it became obvious that the newer 16mp was nicer to work with in Lightroom and showed no problems with long exposures. I'm hopeful the G7 should match the output of the E-m10.

... Now I need to upgrade my PC for 4K.
 
Micehorns said:
Just bought a refurb'd G7 with 14-42 mk2 for £350 from Panasonics eBay store, there's two left at the moment. I missed the double cashback deal, which I think equalled that price. My old G6 has been my favourite camera I've ever bought and the longest I've ever had a camera, the only two issues I had were blown highlights and noise on long exposures. When I got my E-M10 it became obvious that the newer 16mp was nicer to work with in Lightroom and showed no problems with long exposures. I'm hopeful the G7 should match the output of the E-m10.

... Now I need to upgrade my PC for 4K.
Click to expand...

I loved my G6 as well. A superb camera :)
 
Blown highlights are a 'feature' on my G5 and my wifes G3, they need exposure compensation and post processing to get the best out of any (RAW) images, I always turned on the exposure blinkies in anticipation of this problem. I have found my G7 is much better in this respect and it is quite a jump forward in terms of features and image quality. I didn't buy the G6 as it didn't seem to offer enough for the outlay compared to the G5 other than wireless capability.
 
I think that having the in view histogram helps a lot to avoid blown highlights. Despite the dr disadvantage I find that with my G1 I get a higher first time keeper rate than I did with my 5D as with the histogram you can protect the highlights and the shadows can be boosted quite a bit post capture.

The best way forward is to shoot raw and keep an eye on the in view histogram.
 
Last edited:
Couldn't agree more @woof woof Alan. The live histogram and visible blinkies are probably the biggest advantage of any EVF equipped camera.

Simon.
 
woof woof said:
you can protect the highlights and the shadows can be boosted quite a bit post capture.
Click to expand...
Is it better to protect the highlights first and shadows second, or the other way round? I thought that it was easier to recover blown highlights from RAW, so I 've always aimed for the best exposure in the shadows. Did I follow bad advice?
 
Borsch said:
Is it better to protect the highlights first and shadows second, or the other way round? I thought that it was easier to recover blown highlights from RAW, so I 've always aimed for the best exposure in the shadows. Did I follow bad advice?
Click to expand...

Always a balance. I shot raw and always push the histogram as far to the right as I can without blowing highlights. That helps the shadows as much as possible and minimises any noise if you try to recover detail from them. However, blow the highlights, and there's nothing you can really do. Shooting raw helps, but once they're blown, they're blown.

Simon.
 
Yes, Simon says it all there and that's generally how I use my cameras but just wanted to add that sometimes I might also make a conscious decision to expose just for the subject, one way or the other, with the intention of blowing the highlights / blocking the shadow for artistic reasons :D

Mostly though just expose to the right if at all possible.
 
Has anyone with the new GX8 who has used or owned an OMD (EM1, EM5, or EM5 II), been able to compare the two cameras side by side just for image quality (at this stage just image quality, not ergonomics, features etc). The step up from 16mp (where m43 seems to have been for an age) to 20mp is quite compelling, even if the resolution increase is modest, and with the GX8 now selling for only around £600 (with a £75 cash back currently off that), it does look like a bit of a bargain. I was just wondering if the GX8 actually resolves any more detail, and if the ISO performance suffers as a result ?

I also have a collection of really nice Olympus glass (12-40 F2.8, 7-14 F2.8, 40-150 F2.8, 17mm F1.8 & 45mm F1.8), and obviously these lenses are not stabilised, but instead rely on the OMD bodies IBIS. Does the IBIS of the GX8 work as well (and work with these lenses), or is it noticeably worse than the IBIS of the OMD's ?
 
I have owned both the GX8 and OMD EM5 and the GX8 is much better IMO specifically the focussing. I do believe though that Oly cameras need Oly glass though and vice versa.
 
Not too sure about Panasonic cameras needing Panny glass as my Oly lenses seem to do well enough on my Panny bodies.

Anyone got any examples of lenses from either not performing well on the other bodies?

Also, just a quick thought on IS, of course it's nice to have something even it's not used all that often and it'll depend what you shoot but personally not having IS is not s deal breaker for me as usually I want to use shutter speeds at which IS wont matter. I suppose if using long lenses it could help but as I mostly use 17, 25 and 45mm IS doesn't really bother me.
 
Last edited:
@Sootchucker - every single review I have read seems to say that Panasonic still has a way to go before its IBIS system matches that of Olympus. I'm a GX8 user, and shoot with a Sigma 60mm f2.8 regularly. The IBIS helps a lot, but I would be doubtful it would match what you'd get with an Olympus camera.

Simon.
 
Thanks guys, useful information. Might wait until the EM1 II is announced and see what that brings.
 
Is anyone using a Panny 12-35mm f2.8?

I'm toying with the idea of getting a zoom... I have the 14-42mm and whilst it's a humble little thing I have to admit that it's quite good and the only real downside is the aperture range of f3.5-5.6 which means that as it's a little soft wide open and needs stopping down just a bit the ISO can rise as quickly as the shutter speed drops... :( so I'm thinking that a f2.8 will offer zoom flexibility whilst keeping the shutter speed up and the ISO down, maybe.

I mostly use primes so I'm not too sure I'll be able to adapt to zooms but I just thought that a 12-35mm f2.8 might be something nice to try to see if I can live with zooms.

Anyone got any feedback?
 
Yes, I bought the Panasonic 12-35 f2.8 in preference to the Olympus 12-40 for my EM1 as it's quite a bit smaller than the Oly lens and the various tests I found had them about equal in optical performance. I'm very happy with it.
 
I'll post some examples from mine when I get home later. Compared to the 14-42 I used to have I've found it to a bit better but not streets ahead. I think my Canon 17-55 is a better lens but I'm not sure if that's because of sensor size or the lenses themselves. Overall though it's a good lens and I'm happy with it.
 
Good stuff Simon and Sam.

A bump up in image quality would be nice but the main advantage I'm looking for is the constant f2.8 so that I can shoot at... f2.8 :D and also stopped down just a bit at maybe f4 whereas with my 14-42mm if I stop down I'm at f8 before I know it and looking at ISO 1600 and 1/10 second :(

The reason for looking at a zoom is I'm fine with primes when by myself but we're going on holiday in April and my GF always likes me to take plenty of picture so that she can send them to friends and family and I'm thinking that a zoom will be more convenient and quicker than swapping primes about as when I'm with GF I like to minimise the time I'm fiddling with kit.
 
woof woof said:
Good stuff Simon and Sam.

A bump up in image quality would be nice but the main advantage I'm looking for is the constant f2.8 so that I can shoot at... f2.8 :D and also stopped down just a bit at maybe f4 whereas with my 14-42mm if I stop down I'm at f8 before I know it and looking at ISO 1600 and 1/10 second :(

The reason for looking at a zoom is I'm fine with primes when by myself but we're going on holiday in April and my GF always likes me to take plenty of picture so that she can send them to friends and family and I'm thinking that a zoom will be more convenient and quicker than swapping primes about as when I'm with GF I like to minimise the time I'm fiddling with kit.
Click to expand...

Yes that's exactly why I bought the zoom - to have a single lens solution for taking on holiday. The kit zoom is surprisingly good optically, but the build quality of the 2.8 zoom is a big step up as well as it being weather sealed.
 
I usually take two cameras on holiday, a quality camera with a 35 or 50mm equivalent lens for maximum quality and low light use and a decent compact for the wider and longer shots in good light but as my GF's demands (oh err...) for "beautiful pictures" increases I suppose I'll have to up my game :D

Might take two cameras again, one with a prime and the other with a zoom. If I don't need the prime for reasons of aperture (if I have a f2.8 zoom...) it could still come in handy for when I want the smallest and least attention grabbing camera and lens combination :D Could take my GX7 with prime and G1 with zoom or A7 and Panny+zoom.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
Not too sure about Panasonic cameras needing Panny glass as my Oly lenses seem to do well enough on my Panny bodies.

Anyone got any examples of lenses from either not performing well on the other bodies?

Also, just a quick thought on IS, of course it's nice to have something even it's not used all that often and it'll depend what you shoot but personally not having IS is not s deal breaker for me as usually I want to use shutter speeds at which IS wont matter. I suppose if using long lenses it could help but as I mostly use 17, 25 and 45mm IS doesn't really bother me.
Click to expand...

I didn't say they didn't perform well just better [emoji3]
 
Sorry, this isn't the best example but I'm struggling to find non family pictures to share at the moment. I have a few hundred raw files sitting in Lightroom that I haven't processed yet, so as soon as they are done I will post more examples for you at f2.8.

P1010046 copy.jpg
 
If this performs as well as recent additions, I could be very interested in this newly announced lens

http://www.43rumors.com/panasonic-announces-the-new-12-60mm-mft-lens/

Shame it's not a constant f4 throughout the zoom range, and that will no doubt put some off, but as I have faster primes covering my needs in this area I'm not too bothered by that. The inclusion of dust and splash protection is just great. If it turns out to be sharp and contrasty throughout the zoom range, I'm pretty sure this will find its way into my bag as an upgrade to my 14-42mm kit lens.

Cheers,

Simon.
 
woof woof said:
Is anyone using a Panny 12-35mm f2.8?

I'm toying with the idea of getting a zoom... I have the 14-42mm and whilst it's a humble little thing I have to admit that it's quite good and the only real downside is the aperture range of f3.5-5.6 which means that as it's a little soft wide open and needs stopping down just a bit the ISO can rise as quickly as the shutter speed drops... :( so I'm thinking that a f2.8 will offer zoom flexibility whilst keeping the shutter speed up and the ISO down, maybe.

I mostly use primes so I'm not too sure I'll be able to adapt to zooms but I just thought that a 12-35mm f2.8 might be something nice to try to see if I can live with zooms.

Anyone got any feedback?
Click to expand...

I have owned both. Optically I could not see a difference. The Oly is heavier from what I remember but Im sure you would not go wrong with either.
 
Sootchucker said:
. The step up from 16mp (where m43 seems to have been for an age) to 20mp is quite compelling, ...
Click to expand...
I took some test shots in and outside a camera shop, wondering if the GX8's sensor was a step up.
I came to the conclusion the older 16mpx sensor was just as good,
and my Olympii gave better skin tones without a doubt.
The extra megapickles did not give any more resolution (in my quick tests), if you can get your head around that ...
I'll wait for the sensor to mature.
 
To be honest though even if the GX8 just keeps the same image quality it has other attractions such as the build, the fully articulated screen and the (I hope...) better VF.

I'm not a JPEG shooter so I'm pretty sure Oly skin tones wont be an advantage to me.

I think that one thing that could get me to spend my money would be the ability to have auto ISO and dial in compensation in manual mode and I still think it's madness not to allow this, without it Panasonic cameras just seem so slow and clunky next to the (IMO) much more user friendly and elegant Sony's.

On the 12-35mm... haven't made my mind up yet but tried my 14-42mm on my GX7 and the handling seemed ok. Shooting indoors at 42mm was a waste of time as even wide open I was at ISO 25,600 which does indicate the need for a wider aperture.
 
Last edited:
Pretty dark Alan, the f2.8 lens would still be at ISO 6400 wide open!

You need some flash or a f1.4 prime in that light
 
Just a normally lit room in dingy northern England :D

The f2.8 zoom would just be for good light holiday and day out shots. Even f2.8 can be useless indoors...
 
Last edited:
There's an interesting piece on the rumour site...

http://www.43rumors.com/panasonic-i...perior-and-more-classic-cameras-may-come-too/

"Unlike Olympus Panasonic says that optical stabilization is still superior as on sensor stabilization can only correct around 1% of the shifting. That’s enough for wide-angle lenses but not enough for tele lenses. With “extreme” tele lenses you would need a sensor that can shift 20% of its size!
  1. For this reason, Panasonic plans to continue implementing, despite its cost, optical stabilization in all those objectives that actually exceed the 25 mm focal length.
  2. The reason why they added in sensor stabilization on the GX8 is that they understand the value of stabilization with legacy lenses
  3. Panasonic recognizes there is a demand for more “classic” camera with direct controls (like the Fuji X100 or PEN-F).
  4. Panasonic admits that they had to go above 16MP because of pure “marketing” request."
The last two points caught my eye. I do like the idea of direct controls if they work in all modes, the GX8 exposure comp dial not working in manual would bug me.

I'd like to see exposure comp and ISO dials but I don't care if they're metal and engraved or not :D and the simple ability to assign these functions to custom dials would do nicely assuming they work in A, S and M modes :D
 
Last edited:
Ulfric M Douglas said:
With these modern sensors I find the Sigma 30mm F2.8 very useful indoors,
partly due to its really good autofocus in low light.
On my e-pL7 it does a decent job indoors.
Click to expand...

I suppose it depends on the lighting and the subject.

For example in my normally lit house in the evening when it's dark outside and the room lights are the only source of light f2.8 gives a shutter speed of 1/60 at ISO varying from 800 to 6400 depending upon the direction I point the camera but of course 1/60 may be useless for anything other than shots of stuff that doesn't move or posed shots of people sitting or standing still. If wanting to use a more people friendly shutter speed of 1/100 to 1/125 then 3200 to 10,000 ISO may be needed depending upon the light level and the direction the camera is pointed.

Personally I'm happy enough with f2.8 if the shutter speed and ISO can be kept reasonable but for indoor shooting under normal artificial light I'm not sure that it's always enough let alone if the light level is reduced for mood or any other reason.

I used to shoot at gigs a lot and I only had a slow lens and ISO 1600 film but the saving grace was that the prints were relatively small and a bit (or actually quite a lot) of motion blur sometimes wasn't actually noticeable (by ordinary people, us geeks would obviously see it) or actually added to a shot but I'm not sure that's the look I'd want when taking pictures of friends and family indoors as movement can ruin a shot when viewed on a tablet or even a smartphone so I usually want to keep the shutter speed reasonable and that could mean using f1.8.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top