"Panasonic G series" Owners Thread

woof woof said:
It's a compact and nice lens but focus is slow and I don't think it does continuous focus so it's ok for static shots but anything else can possibly be a problem. I have one but the other primes and indeed zooms I have are all much faster focusing.
Click to expand...
Before I had a chance to read your post I bought a 25/1.4, sounds like it was the best choice then.
Really good price and another tenner off for subscribing to their newsletter.
 
Stephen L said:
Well, this topic has been a wake-up call for me. I originally went back into m4/3 as a weight-saving exercise, but as usual GAS intervened, and I ended up with a G9 body and two Leica-branded lenses; the 12-60 and the 8-18. This setup is not particularly light. Whilst I am not prepared to forsake the ergonomics of the G9, this conversation has prompted me to examine the exifs of shots taken with these 2 lenses. As a result I am disposing of both lenses in favour of the Lumix 12-60 and the Laowa 7.5mm. Got what I think is a good price quote from MPB in exchange for the Lumix and have bought a nearly-new Laowa from Ebay. This should result iin a much lighter bag.
Click to expand...
Sorry !!

I’d keep the 8-18 though ! Too me it feels very light and small compared to the Oly 8-25 I had before !

I’m going to try the LUMIX 12-60 but am keeping my Oly 12-45 just in case the LUMIX disappoints.

The Em 1 mk iii is a little smaller and lighter than the G9 but still has great ergonomics !
 
Last edited:
d00d said:
That's a manual focus only lens, isn't it?
Click to expand...
Yes, but auto aperture. On such a wide lens (14mm equivalent) it’s not a problem to zone focus.
 
tijuana taxi said:
Before I had a chance to read your post I bought a 25/1.4, sounds like it was the best choice then.
Really good price and another tenner off for subscribing to their newsletter.
Click to expand...

I had the 20mm years ago but sold it because of the slow focus and bought the Oly 17, 25 and 45mm f1.8's. I've recently rebought the 20mm because I wanted the most compact prime to mount on a GM5 I bought. For posed and static subjects or I suppose hyperfocal and other prefocus techniques it's fine but I wouldn't recommend it for anything more demanding.
 
justa1972 said:
Sorry !!

I’d keep the 8-18 though ! Too me it feels very light and small compared to the Oly 8-25 I had before !

I’m going to try the LUMIX 12-60 but am keeping my Oly 12-45 just in case the LUMIX disappoints.

The Em 1 mk iii is a little smaller and lighter than the G9 but still has great ergonomics !
Click to expand...
Well, looking at my keepers from that lens, all are under 12mm and most at 8mm, and of those at 8mm in the majority of cases I could have used a little bit wider. I should add that I have a clutch of fixed-length lenses for wide apertures. Don’t apologise, you’ve done me and my painful shoulders a favour!
 
Stephen L said:
Well, this topic has been a wake-up call for me. I originally went back into m4/3 as a weight-saving exercise, but as usual GAS intervened, and I ended up with a G9 body and two Leica-branded lenses; the 12-60 and the 8-18. This setup is not particularly light. Whilst I am not prepared to forsake the ergonomics of the G9, this conversation has prompted me to examine the exifs of shots taken with these 2 lenses. As a result I am disposing of both lenses in favour of the Lumix 12-60 and the Laowa 7.5mm. Got what I think is a good price quote from MPB in exchange for the Lumix and have bought a nearly-new Laowa from Ebay. This should result iin a much lighter bag.
Click to expand...
I used the proceeds from the Leica 12-60 to get a Lumix 12-60 and a Lumix 7-14. Very nice lens too with very little distortion without the lens corrections applied.
The lens that stays on my G9 most of the time is the 14-140 ii, not much bigger or heavier than the 12-60. If I want something very light, I use a G80 with a 12-60.
 
Sangoma said:
I used the proceeds from the Leica 12-60 to get a Lumix 12-60 and a Lumix 7-14. Very nice lens too with very little distortion without the lens corrections applied.
Click to expand...
Given the close co-operation between the current Leica company and Panasonic for the last several years, it wouldn't surprise me if I learned that all three lenses were designed by the same group, using the same software and made using the same tools and machines. Leica is simply A. N. Other brand, these days...
 
Advice needed please.
I have the G80, and like it a lot, however, I am on a tight budget and therefore 100-300mm pana power OIS is as big as I'll be going.
I like shooting wildlife and often need to crop a fair bit.
If I traded in for a Pana MFT with 20MP would this help me retain image quality when I crop, is it significant enough to make a trade?
Or am I chasing rainbows?
 
Crotal Bell said:
Advice needed please.
I have the G80, and like it a lot, however, I am on a tight budget and therefore 100-300mm pana power OIS is as big as I'll be going.
I like shooting wildlife and often need to crop a fair bit.
If I traded in for a Pana MFT with 20MP would this help me retain image quality when I crop, is it significant enough to make a trade?
Or am I chasing rainbows?
Click to expand...
Yes, the difference between the G80 and the G9 is very noticeable when cropping, and negligible when not.

There are less expensive choices than the G9, but they are all missing often used features for very little difference in price.

The G90 is like a 20MP version of the G80, but they are only slightly less than a G9. (I paid under £600 for my boxed as new G9 with a 12-60 lens, and a 2300 shutter count)

I think they offer £200 or less for a G80, and mine had a shutter count of 143 when I bought it, so wouldn't trade it in for peanuts :) (having said that, two G80s have sold on ebay for around £200 recently)

However, you have been taking some good shots up to now, so may be an idea to feed the piggy bank until you can keep the G80 as well :)
 
Crotal Bell said:
Advice needed please.
I have the G80, and like it a lot, however, I am on a tight budget and therefore 100-300mm pana power OIS is as big as I'll be going.
I like shooting wildlife and often need to crop a fair bit.
If I traded in for a Pana MFT with 20MP would this help me retain image quality when I crop, is it significant enough to make a trade?
Or am I chasing rainbows?
Click to expand...
Yes you would get more cropping ability from 25% extra pixels, its that or use fieldcraft to get nearer.
If you decide on a new camera you might find a secondhand G90 at a reasonable price.
John Lewis sold their stock off for £499 and Amazon did too for the same amount
Same battery as your G80 and pretty much same controls with a few extra in camera functions.
Olympus E-M1 ii would also fit the bill albeit you wouldn't get dual IS, but their IBIS is very good.
 
I've been thinking about something like a Fuji 24mp apsc for those really random street shots where 100% crop might be needed.

There's a tidy looking XA5+15-45mm for less than £300. Hmmm might be fun, tilty screen too.

Are we to assume sensor sizes, ie M43 vs APSC and number of MPs mean what I think they mean? Or are there other things to look out for?
 
Crotal Bell said:
Advice needed please.
I have the G80, and like it a lot, however, I am on a tight budget and therefore 100-300mm pana power OIS is as big as I'll be going.
I like shooting wildlife and often need to crop a fair bit.
If I traded in for a Pana MFT with 20MP would this help me retain image quality when I crop, is it significant enough to make a trade?
Or am I chasing rainbows?
Click to expand...

I have 16 and 20mp cameras and I don't think the difference is significant enough to make a difference for me but others do. If you like I'll take two pictures and send them to you so you can judge for yourself. Would that help?
 
Don't forget the GX9, which is essentially the same innards as the G9. Can be had for about £300.
 
woof woof said:
I have 16 and 20mp cameras and I don't think the difference is significant enough to make a difference for me but others do. If you like I'll take two pictures and send them to you so you can judge for yourself. Would that help?
Click to expand...
That would be very helpful Alan, thanks. Generally speaking I find bird in flight shots need a healthy crop. I realise that I won't be getting award winning photos either way, but if the added pixels enable me to retain a bit more sharpness, then that's going to help me enjoy my photography.
 
Crotal Bell said:
That would be very helpful Alan, thanks. Generally speaking I find bird in flight shots need a healthy crop. I realise that I won't be getting award winning photos either way, but if the added pixels enable me to retain a bit more sharpness, then that's going to help me enjoy my photography.
Click to expand...

I think I'm heading out just now but will take two pictures at some point today and will pm you dropbox info so you can collect the raws.
 
20mp will let you print with out upscaling 300dpi at A3 and the crop would in theory give you an extra 25% leeway.
Image quality may not be that different at first look, but more detail is evident to my eyes.
If you use jpeg the improved processing algorithm in the newer cameras gives nicer results.
This review highlights some differences between the G80 and G90
 
Last edited:
I think the print size has to be directly relevant to digital cropability.
 
d00d said:
I think the print size has to be directly relevant to digital cropability.
Click to expand...
I've mentioned this before but I think it bears saying again: it's entirely possible to get attractive A0 or even bigger images from a 6MP or even a 3.4MP original.

This is not speculation because I've seen it done. A travelling wildlife picture exhibition came to an empty office space near us a few years ago. The picture captions usefully described the cameras and (sometimes) lenses used for each image. The commonest cameras listed were (from memory) the Canon 10d and the Nikon D70 although there were a wide variety used including a few bridge cameras with the much maligned 1/2.3 sensors. From memory, the densest sensor used was 10MP and that was in a small format.

The images, which could be examined closely, were sharp and with good colour. I grabbed a couple of general shots to remind me of the exhibition...

Wildlife photography exhibition at Winslade Park DSC01097.JPGWildlife photography exhibition at Winslade Park DSC01107.JPG
 
Just for interest.

The light is different but that's what happens.

16mp GX80 at 120%.

uw59s6x.jpg


20mp GX9 at 100%.

zooiaPw.jpg
 
I'm in Wales at the moment and just been to Elan Valley with my G9 and took the Lumix 12-35 f2.8 with me. First time I've used that lens so will be interesting to see how the pictures look. It's replaced the PL 12-60 f4 (now on my gx9).
 
This sign is 100' away, I have cropped until pixelation in obvious on the G80, but not obvious on the G9

Bit difficult to get a better comparison as the light changes a lot in between changing cameras


G80.jpg
G80


g9.jpg
G9

Forecast is for sun later, so will repeat it if possible


Both ISO 200 and f8
 
d00d said:
I think the print size has to be directly relevant to digital cropability.
Click to expand...
Yes David, clearly the extra MP makes a tad of difference.
Interesting to look at the GX8, it has all the features of my G80 but came out a few months earlier. The GX8 was considerably more expensive but these days comparatively cheap for a good used model, and the 20MP sensor.
 
Sangoma said:
This sign is 100' away, I have cropped until pixelation in obvious on the G80, but not obvious on the G9

Bit difficult to get a better comparison as the light changes a lot in between changing cameras


View attachment 362577
G80


View attachment 362578
G9

Forecast is for sun later, so will repeat it if possible


Both ISO 200 and f8
Click to expand...
Ironically I think the G80 looks better, but as you say, the light is different. Thanks for taking the time to do this.

The other thing I have to consider is whether I am simply pushing these cameras out of their comfort zone, I mean birds in flight with MFT and a 100-300mm lens, even with an added 4PM is this really going to make a real difference given what I'm trying to achieve?
The hardest part for a beginner is not having experience of other cameras to draw on.
I originally looked at the GX8, and preferred the DSLR shape of the G80, on reflection though, the higher MP probably should have been the priority. The GX8 was a considerably more expensive camera but good used ones are affordable now. My main worry is going through the trade in and not really feeling any better off for it.
 
Crotal Bell said:
Ironically I think the G80 looks better, but as you say, the light is different. Thanks for taking the time to do this.

The other thing I have to consider is whether I am simply pushing these cameras out of their comfort zone, I mean birds in flight with MFT and a 100-300mm lens, even with an added 4PM is this really going to make a real difference given what I'm trying to achieve?
The hardest part for a beginner is not having experience of other cameras to draw on.
I originally looked at the GX8, and preferred the DSLR shape of the G80, on reflection though, the higher MP probably should have been the priority. The GX8 was a considerably more expensive camera but good used ones are affordable now. My main worry is going through the trade in and not really feeling any better off for it.
Click to expand...
If you want to see great examples of birds in flight using m4/3, may I suggest you visit the Olympus section, especially @the black fox and @RedRobin
 
Crotal Bell said:
...is this really going to make a real difference given what I'm trying to achieve?
Click to expand...
Frankly, I don't think it will make as much difference as just concentrating on getting the picture.

So what if it's not perfectly sharp? A picture that illustrates what you want to show will always be more useful than a perfectly composed, sharp and ultimately lifeless image. Above all, learn to ignore both praise and abuse.

Do your thing and enjoy yourself.
 
tijuana taxi said:
20mp will let you print with out upscaling 300dpi at A3 and the crop would in theory give you an extra 25% leeway.
Image quality may not be that different at first look, but more detail is evident to my eyes.
If you use jpeg the improved processing algorithm in the newer cameras gives nicer results.
This review highlights some differences between the G80 and G90
Click to expand...
There's not much in it is there, the G90 still holds a somewhat hefty price tag in the used market. The GX8 can be bought a lot cheaper and seems to tick all the same boxes?
 
tijuana taxi said:
Shouldn't you be showing them at the same magnification to show the difference in crop factor rather than image quality.
Click to expand...

I think Keith is interested in cropping so rather than show them at the same magnification I increased the magnification from the 16mp camera to match the 20mp one.

Anyway, Keith has access to the raws and can make his own mind up.
 
Stephen L said:
If you want to see great examples of birds in flight using m4/3, may I suggest you visit the Olympus section, especially @the black fox and @RedRobin
Click to expand...
.... That's very kind of you Stephen but Jeff @the black fox is better than I am on birds in flight on m4/3 - He has a particular talent for it. I'm a bit lazy about going for birds in flight nowadays although I am finding the Olympus OM-1 more reliable for it than the E-M1X. Cheers!
 
When I bought the GX80 over the GX9 is was because the GX80 had less but bigger pixels, and bigger pixels are better.

I don't know where I got that from exactly. :runaway:
 
d00d said:
When I bought the GX80 over the GX9 is was because the GX80 had less but bigger pixels, and bigger pixels are better.

I don't know where I got that from exactly. :runaway:
Click to expand...
On the other hand, it might be said that smaller but newer tech pixels are better than larger but older pixels … ;)
 
I know I keep saying this and I know other people will disagree but I see no significant difference between the 16mp GX80 and the 20mp GX9. I have different lenses on each of mine but I wouldn't obsess and choose one over the other for image quality which I suppose means that the GX9 is the best as there's no drop in image quality with the additional 4mp.
 
Crotal Bell said:
Ironically I think the G80 looks better, but as you say, the light is different. Thanks for taking the time to do this.

The other thing I have to consider is whether I am simply pushing these cameras out of their comfort zone, I mean birds in flight with MFT and a 100-300mm lens, even with an added 4PM is this really going to make a real difference given what I'm trying to achieve?
The hardest part for a beginner is not having experience of other cameras to draw on.
I originally looked at the GX8, and preferred the DSLR shape of the G80, on reflection though, the higher MP probably should have been the priority. The GX8 was a considerably more expensive camera but good used ones are affordable now. My main worry is going through the trade in and not really feeling any better off for it.
Click to expand...
I think that is light, but have a look at the edges of the larger letters, you can see the pixelation on the G80.

But you are looking at something the size of a robin 100' away, so as some one said, how you take the picture will make the biggest difference :)

There is another one of those signs about 400' away, and the difference is more noticeable, but are you going to want such extremes?
 
woof woof said:
I know I keep saying this and I know other people will disagree but I see no significant difference between the 16mp GX80 and the 20mp GX9. I have different lenses on each of mine but I wouldn't obsess and choose one over the other for image quality which I suppose means that the GX9 is the best as there's no drop in image quality with the additional 4mp.
Click to expand...
Maybe, just maybe, were you to put two otherwise identical prints side by side a difference would be noted, but in the real world we don’t do that. There’s far too much “emperors new clothes” about many aspects of camera and lens technology.
 
Stephen L said:
On the other hand, it might be said that smaller but newer tech pixels are better than larger but older pixels … ;)
Click to expand...
;) yay ... 1 year & 10 months between the GX80 & GX9 ... a long time in the modern world of technological advancement.
 
Sangoma said:
I think that is light, but have a look at the edges of the larger letters, you can see the pixelation on the G80.

But you are looking at something the size of a robin 100' away, so as some one said, how you take the picture will make the biggest difference :)

There is another one of those signs about 400' away, and the difference is more noticeable, but are you going to want such extremes?
Click to expand...
It's a good question, and I think the answer is beginning to surface. A bird in flight at distance that needs a heavy crop won't be saved by 4MP.
But get the shot right with 16MP and it will look fine.....if you get it right !
 
Crotal Bell said:
It's a good question, and I think the answer is beginning to surface. A bird in flight at distance that needs a heavy crop won't be saved by 4MP.
But get the shot right with 16MP and it will look fine.....if you get it right !
Click to expand...

I'm not a long lens user but just snapping birds in the garden has shown me that to get a bird big in the frame even with a crop you need a long lens and to close the distance as much as possible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top