"Panasonic G series" Owners Thread

[woof woof]

G100 and Oly 17mm f1.8 go to the seaside.

It was misty...

Hmmmm...

Small train.

Paddling.

I like this camera but I wish it had a second top of camera control dial and if it did I'd love it.

 

[woof woof]

One more.

Is this two men oggling Mrs WW?

 

[Testudo Man]

Opinions please, on the Panasonic 35-100mm f/2.8 lens? Both the older Mk 1, an the newer Mk 2 version, would be helpful.
Who's actually owned one of these lenses, put it to good use/lived with it for awhile, an can give me a honest opinion.
Ive been thinking about buying one for some time now, an will be mounting it on my Panny G80. I would also be attaching both the Canon 250D an 500D close up filters, for pretty much all of the time. I currently use the Panny 45-150mm lens (which has the Canon 500D close up filter on 99.9% of the time). Would the 35-100mm f/2.8 lens make that much of an improvement, over my 45-150mm lens? I shoot close up UK wildlife, an the main subjects being Butterflies/Reptiles etc.
I dont generally buy new camera gear, so im happy with 2nd hand equipment. Fleabay prices are all over the place, an it would seem between £300 to £500 could be the going rate?? The lower price range for Mk 1's, up to the higher price for the Mk 2's...obviously the Mk 2's are priced even higher than £500, but i dont ever pay over the odds for gear, like most people, im keen on getting a bargain!
Thanks in advance, cheers Paul.

 

[Testudo Man]

A couple of recent butterfly images from last weekend. The (2nd brood of the year) Adonis Blues are now on the wing, but small numbers really, i would think the recent drought conditions are not helping?! 1st image is not cropped, but the 2nd image is cropped some.

Male Adonis Blue Butterfly (open wing).

Male Adonis Blue Butterfly (2nd brood). No cropping. by Tort Man (out of hibernation!), on Flickr

Male Adonis Blue Butterfly (closed wing).

Male Adonis Blue Butterfly (2nd brood). by Tort Man (out of hibernation!), on Flickr

 

[tijuana taxi]

Opinions please, on the Panasonic 35-100mm f/2.8 lens? Both the older Mk 1, an the newer Mk 2 version, would be helpful.
Who's actually owned one of these lenses, put it to good use/lived with it for awhile, an can give me a honest opinion.
Ive been thinking about buying one for some time now, an will be mounting it on my Panny G80. I would also be attaching both the Canon 250D an 500D close up filters, for pretty much all of the time. I currently use the Panny 45-150mm lens (which has the Canon 500D close up filter on 99.9% of the time). Would the 35-100mm f/2.8 lens make that much of an improvement, over my 45-150mm lens? I shoot close up UK wildlife, an the main subjects being Butterflies/Reptiles etc.
I dont generally buy new camera gear, so im happy with 2nd hand equipment. Fleabay prices are all over the place, an it would seem between £300 to £500 could be the going rate?? The lower price range for Mk 1's, up to the higher price for the Mk 2's...obviously the Mk 2's are priced even higher than £500, but i dont ever pay over the odds for gear, like most people, im keen on getting a bargain!
Thanks in advance, cheers Paul.

I owned the 35-100 mk1 and the 12-35 mk1, they were used on a G80 and GX9.
The longer lens was very good for its entire focal range and the shorter one wasnt far behind.
They also worked with dual is on both cameras, but only version 1 the GX9. No real issues with either, I only sold them when the Olympus 12-100 appeared.
Prefer the one lens option and to be honest the 12-100 is slightly better. That is taking into account both lenses, about equal in the 35-100 range.

 

[Snapsh0t]

Opinions please, on the Panasonic 35-100mm f/2.8 lens? Both the older Mk 1, an the newer Mk 2 version, would be helpful.
Who's actually owned one of these lenses, put it to good use/lived with it for awhile, an can give me a honest opinion.
Ive been thinking about buying one for some time now, an will be mounting it on my Panny G80. I would also be attaching both the Canon 250D an 500D close up filters, for pretty much all of the time. I currently use the Panny 45-150mm lens (which has the Canon 500D close up filter on 99.9% of the time). Would the 35-100mm f/2.8 lens make that much of an improvement, over my 45-150mm lens? I shoot close up UK wildlife, an the main subjects being Butterflies/Reptiles etc.
I dont generally buy new camera gear, so im happy with 2nd hand equipment. Fleabay prices are all over the place, an it would seem between £300 to £500 could be the going rate?? The lower price range for Mk 1's, up to the higher price for the Mk 2's...obviously the Mk 2's are priced even higher than £500, but i dont ever pay over the odds for gear, like most people, im keen on getting a bargain!
Thanks in advance, cheers Paul.

The 35-100 f2.8 is probably a better lens than the 45-150mm but I don't think it would necessarily be better for your use. The wider maximum aperture is not an advantage when using close-up lenses as you'll be stopped down most of the time and the missing 50mm at the long end will cost you magnification and/or working distance. If you're happy with your results then stick with what you've got.

 

[d00d]

Opinions please, on the Panasonic 35-100mm f/2.8 lens? Both the older Mk 1, an the newer Mk 2 version, would be helpful.
Who's actually owned one of these lenses, put it to good use/lived with it for awhile, an can give me a honest opinion.
Ive been thinking about buying one for some time now, an will be mounting it on my Panny G80. I would also be attaching both the Canon 250D an 500D close up filters, for pretty much all of the time. I currently use the Panny 45-150mm lens (which has the Canon 500D close up filter on 99.9% of the time). Would the 35-100mm f/2.8 lens make that much of an improvement, over my 45-150mm lens? I shoot close up UK wildlife, an the main subjects being Butterflies/Reptiles etc.
I dont generally buy new camera gear, so im happy with 2nd hand equipment. Fleabay prices are all over the place, an it would seem between £300 to £500 could be the going rate?? The lower price range for Mk 1's, up to the higher price for the Mk 2's...obviously the Mk 2's are priced even higher than £500, but i dont ever pay over the odds for gear, like most people, im keen on getting a bargain!
Thanks in advance, cheers Paul.

Hi ... have you thought about working out which is the best focal length for your macro work with your two close-up filters attached, then seeing if there is a prime lens available to suit? For example, I have a Raynox 250 that works well at 60mm, so use my 12-60 or 45-150. I may find I'll get better results with the Sigma 56 + Raynox. Just a thought. And BTW the Sigma 56mm f/1.4 is a super lens I'd find other uses for.

 

[delb0y]

I've had the 35-100 ii for several years. One of my favourite lenses. I use it on my G80, but did also have it on the GX85 for a trio to San Francisco. I've have nothing but positive things to say about it, to the extent that I spent the last year saving up and have just bought the 12-35ii to partner it I bought both lenses second hand, too - it's the way to go!

Haven't really done any close-up wildlife with it, so not sure how it would fare for you. Perhaps I'll try and take something in the garden later!

 

[Stephen L]

I've had the 35-100 ii for several years. One of my favourite lenses. I use it on my G80, but did also have it on the GX85 for a trio to San Francisco. I've have nothing but positive things to say about it, to the extent that I spent the last year saving up and have just bought the 12-35ii to partner it I bought both lenses second hand, too - it's the way to go!

Haven't really done any close-up wildlife with it, so not sure how it would fare for you. Perhaps I'll try and take something in the garden later!

I had the 12-35 Mk1 back in the day, and swapped it for the Oly 12-40 when it first came out. I remember thinking at the time it was a bad move as the Panny was just as good yet smaller. The 35-100 has a similar reputation.

 

[tijuana taxi]

@Testudo Man
Further to my earlier post, have you considered the 12-100?
Its very good close up amd its in lens stabilisation is excellent.
Here's one hand held, not really my thing so someone with more experience would no doubt do better.

 

[Stephen L]

I originally had the Oly 12-100 when I bought my E-M1ii, and it was super on that body. But of course dual IS does not work if it’s fitted to a Lumix, plus to my perception there was a slight drop in quality - not totally surprising given it was optimised for Olympus. So I swapped it for the Leica 12-60 and sacrificed the extra 40mm. For reasons of lightness I have subsequently dropped to the “other” 12-60, with the same IQ at the expense of maximum aperture. Of course, all the above is just my opinion and feelings - others may have a different take on it.

 

[tijuana taxi]

Cant say I've noticed any difference with the 12-100 on Panasonic bodies.
In fact I prefer using Olympus lenses especially the 12-45.
Had the 12-40 too and that waa very good on my GX9.
Only Panasonic lenses I own now are the PL 9, 15 and 25.

 

[delb0y]

Experimented with the G80 and the 35-100ii in the garden just now. For macro the lens on its own simply doesn't focus close enough - although drop a Raynox on it and it works well. Really needed a tripod, but this was handheld. The close-up is cropped. I was just trying to illustrate the close focus distance of the lens .

The G80 was driving me mad - had the dreaded "please turn the camera off and on again" about eight times in the five minutes I was out in the garden. The camera used to do this a lot, but has been okay(ish) recently. As the on-off switch is broken I have to take the battery out to actually turn it off/on and then all the settings revert to something different. In a way I wish it would error like this all the time, then I'd feel better about throwing it out and buying a G9... The articulated screen hinge is broken, too, and is held in place by tape (the screen still articulates, but I can't open the bit on the side of the camera to give me access to whatever's in there - USB port, headphone socket, charger port... I don't know as I can't open it), so it's in pretty poor shape, but it still works most if the time...

 

[delb0y]

And a sparrow taken with the 100-300.

 

[Stephen L]

May I respectfully suggest that the G80 has served its time and be sold for spares? By the way, I love the spadger shot.

 

[Testudo Man]

I owned the 35-100 mk1 and the 12-35 mk1, they were used on a G80 and GX9.
The longer lens was very good for its entire focal range and the shorter one wasnt far behind.
They also worked with dual is on both cameras, but only version 1 the GX9. No real issues with either, I only sold them when the Olympus 12-100 appeared.
Prefer the one lens option and to be honest the 12-100 is slightly better. That is taking into account both lenses, about equal in the 35-100 range.

Thanks, The Oly 12-100mm looks like a chunk of money, which might be a little over the top for me an my butterflies!

The 35-100 f2.8 is probably a better lens than the 45-150mm but I don't think it would necessarily be better for your use. The wider maximum aperture is not an advantage when using close-up lenses as you'll be stopped down most of the time and the missing 50mm at the long end will cost you magnification and/or working distance. If you're happy with your results then stick with what you've got.

Cheers, im quite happy with my current results...but we are always looking for ways to improve. I should say that most of my butterfly images are close up rather than macro...if i want to shoot macro, i tend to use a different camera set up, to get much closer to smaller subjects. The G80/45-150mm/500D close up filter set up is good at 150mm, but not good enough for real marco images. The 2 Adonis Blue images i recently posted, were shot at 97mm, an although i cropped the closed wing image, i try not to crop most of my stuff. You are right, most of the time im shooting up to f/16 for open wings, then f/8 to f/11 for closed wings.

Hi ... have you thought about working out which is the best focal length for your macro work with your two close-up filters attached, then seeing if there is a prime lens available to suit? For example, I have a Raynox 250 that works well at 60mm, so use my 12-60 or 45-150. I may find I'll get better results with the Sigma 56 + Raynox. Just a thought. And BTW the Sigma 56mm f/1.4 is a super lens I'd find other uses for.

Thanks for your comment. The sweet spot for me, would be somewhere between 75 to 100mm, when i go from 100 to 150mm (for butterflies) things get much harder to achieve, what i want from my images. Zoom lenses work better for me (rather than primes). Ive often thought about the Oly 60mm macro, but it wouldnt give me enough focal range, for what im after. The sigma 56mm would frustrate me, an fall short of what im aiming for. I use both Raynox 250 an 150, but on another camera set up...Raynox lenses are great...but not for my butterfly images.

I've had the 35-100 ii for several years. One of my favourite lenses. I use it on my G80, but did also have it on the GX85 for a trio to San Francisco. I've have nothing but positive things to say about it, to the extent that I spent the last year saving up and have just bought the 12-35ii to partner it I bought both lenses second hand, too - it's the way to go!

Haven't really done any close-up wildlife with it, so not sure how it would fare for you. Perhaps I'll try and take something in the garden later!

Cheers for that, remember im always attaching a qaulity close up lens to any lens i use...without close up/achromat lenses i would probably need to go beyond 150mm, to get the same sort of results that im getting right now.

I originally had the Oly 12-100 when I bought my E-M1ii, and it was super on that body. But of course dual IS does not work if it’s fitted to a Lumix, plus to my perception there was a slight drop in quality - not totally surprising given it was optimised for Olympus. So I swapped it for the Leica 12-60 and sacrificed the extra 40mm. For reasons of lightness I have subsequently dropped to the “other” 12-60, with the same IQ at the expense of maximum aperture. Of course, all the above is just my opinion and feelings - others may have a different take on it.

Thanks, i think the Oly 12-100mm lens might not be best suited to my needs.

Experimented with the G80 and the 35-100ii in the garden just now. For macro the lens on its own simply doesn't focus close enough - although drop a Raynox on it and it works well. Really needed a tripod, but this was handheld. The close-up is cropped. I was just trying to illustrate the close focus distance of the lens .

The G80 was driving me mad - had the dreaded "please turn the camera off and on again" about eight times in the five minutes I was out in the garden. The camera used to do this a lot, but has been okay(ish) recently. As the on-off switch is broken I have to take the battery out to actually turn it off/on and then all the settings revert to something different. In a way I wish it would error like this all the time, then I'd feel better about throwing it out and buying a G9... The articulated screen hinge is broken, too, and is held in place by tape (the screen still articulates, but I can't open the bit on the side of the camera to give me access to whatever's in there - USB port, headphone socket, charger port... I don't know as I can't open it), so it's in pretty poor shape, but it still works most if the time...

Thanks for giving it a go(even with your temperamental G80)!!!...I always shoot handheld too, butterflies dont wait for setting up a tripod.

@Testudo Man
Further to my earlier post, have you considered the 12-100?
Its very good close up amd its in lens stabilisation is excellent.
Here's one hand held, not really my thing so someone with more experience would no doubt do better.

View attachment 363781

Cheers, thats a good Odonata/Dragonfly image...as ive said above, i just think the Oly 12-100mm might be over the top for my needs. I rarely shoot below 60mm zoom, an more often than not, im shooting between 75-100mm.

 

[Testudo Man]

Just to add, thanks again for all your opinions on the 35-100mm 2.8 lens, its appreciated.

Cheers Paul.

 

[Sangoma]

Experimented with the G80 and the 35-100ii in the garden just now. For macro the lens on its own simply doesn't focus close enough - although drop a Raynox on it and it works well. Really needed a tripod, but this was handheld. The close-up is cropped. I was just trying to illustrate the close focus distance of the lens .

The G80 was driving me mad - had the dreaded "please turn the camera off and on again" about eight times in the five minutes I was out in the garden. The camera used to do this a lot, but has been okay(ish) recently. As the on-off switch is broken I have to take the battery out to actually turn it off/on and then all the settings revert to something different. In a way I wish it would error like this all the time, then I'd feel better about throwing it out and buying a G9... The articulated screen hinge is broken, too, and is held in place by tape (the screen still articulates, but I can't open the bit on the side of the camera to give me access to whatever's in there - USB port, headphone socket, charger port... I don't know as I can't open it), so it's in pretty poor shape, but it still works most if the time...

Really think you should get that G9, don't want to miss the shot of a lifetime tomorrow if it comes up

 

[Snapsh0t]

Cheers, thats a good Odonata/Dragonfly image...as ive said above, i just think the Oly 12-100mm might be over the top for my needs. I rarely shoot below 60mm zoom, an more often than not, im shooting between 75-100mm.

A much more suitable lens than the 12-100mm would be the new(ish) Oly 40-150mm f4. It's cheaper than the 12-100mm and only slightly more than the 35-100mm but not available s/h.

 

[d00d]

BBC TV Centre today. GX80+45-150

 

[delb0y]

GX85 with the 100-300 zoom.

 

[Crotal Bell]

While I was stuck on a Teams call around midday, someone in the garden was already having their lunch from the bird feeders.
Pany G80 and 100-300mm

 

[delb0y]

This is from the little GM1 - no viewfinder so you're never really sure what you've got on a sunny day.

For some reason anything larger than 600 pixels was resulting in a "Your image is too large" error - so it's a wee bit small.

 

[woof woof]

This is from the little GM1 - no viewfinder so you're never really sure what you've got on a sunny day.

For some reason anything larger than 600 pixels was resulting in a "Your image is too large" error - so it's a wee bit small.

View attachment 364317

Maybe the size of the file due to lots of foliage detail?

I usually save at 1,000 pixels along the long side but some pictures are ok at quality 12 (CS5) whilst other have to drop down to 9 or even lower sometimes.

So maybe you need to drop the file quality down a bit?

Lovely picture though

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

So maybe you need to drop the file quality down a bit?

I'm pretty sure maximum image size for uploaded images here is 850 pixels on the longest side. Maximum file size is 500KB. I imagine you could get round that by hosting elsewhere and just creating a live link (I haven't tried it myself).

 

[woof woof]

I'm pretty sure maximum image size for uploaded images here is 850 pixels on the longest side. Maximum file size is 500KB. I imagine you could get round that by hosting elsewhere and just creating a live link (I haven't tried it myself).

I upload to IMGUR at 1,000 and they post fine here but I don't know if this site does any auto downsizing too.

 

[Stephen L]

First shot from my Laowa C-Dreamer 7.5mm, G9

Upper Settle from Watery Lane by Stephen Lee, on Flickr

 

[woof woof]

This is perhaps the closest she's ever come to an unusual pose. Usually she just says "Take my picture" while she stands and smiles.

The Italian garden at Saltburn. G100 and Oly 17mm f1.8.

One more while I'm here. Blue sky, nice wall, nice mosaic, nice smile and nice camera. As I keep obsessing over... if this camera had a second top of camera control I'd love it.

 

[Stephen L]

With the Oly 9-18 on the G9

Barns, walls, and cows by Stephen Lee, on Flickr

 

[woof woof]

I do like drystone walls

 

[Stephen L]

I do like drystone walls

There's a drystone waller lives in our close. Plenty of work for him round here!

 

[woof woof]

There's a drystone waller lives in our close. Plenty of work for him round here!

I also like bricks especially when in a walled garden.

 

[Crotal Bell]

G80 vs G90?

I like the idea of having 20MP, the extra will help with the occasions i have to crop. The reviews are not very positive in general. A high quality used G9 is just a bit too costly for mu budget but I could stretch to the G90 in excellent condition, ad sell the G80. What are peoples thoughts? (stills are my priority)

 

[Sangoma]

My G9 had a low shutter count (2749), looks brand new and was boxed, and cost under 600 with a 12-60 lens (can't remember the exact figure without looking)

There is a huge difference between the G90 and the G9.
Probably worth a wait.
However, in basic specs they are very similar

G80s have been going for just over 200 on ebay, so again may be worth a wait. I think the trade in offered is around 200 as well.

If the G90 will do what you need, and you can get one for significantly less than a G9, then I would think it may be worth doing, but if the prices are fairly close, it would be worth waiting a bit.

 

[tijuana taxi]

I have had a G90 and I'm not sure why it gets less than positive reviews.
Assuming that is because of the video crop rate, something I know little of and never use.
Its nicer in the hand than the G80 because its slightly bigger which allows space for the little finger.
Everything else about it is good and a nice improvement on the already very decent G80.

EVF is supposed to be the same as the G80, but I thought it was a bit clearer.
Menu system is improved especially getting the my menu section which I like a lot.
Also gets the three top buttons (not the top LCD though) from the G9 for ISO, EV and WB, they come in handy.
Only thing I missed from the G80 was the eyecup, best I have used on any camera, no chance of that falling off.

I also had a G80 and have a G9 so can compare all three from personal experience.
G9 is more expensive, bigger and heavier, IBIS possibly slightly better than the others.
Different battery which doesn't come cheap when buying a spare, some users dislike the sensitive shutter button.
Joystick on the G9 is a great addition although the focus point can be moved by touch on the G90 LCD
Image quality virtually identical between the two 20mp cameras, no idea about video capability.

Saying all that most of the time I use my little GX9 with just two lenses, Olympus 12-45 and now the new 9/1.7
IBIS is a stop worse, but the image quality is excellent, 20mp with same excellent menu system.
So nice to just take a small shoulder bag when wandering about or travelling.
Only downside would be if you use longer lenses, saying that I have used it with the 12-100.
Plenty to think about there, in your position I would probably go G90 at the right price.

 

[woof woof]

G80 vs G90?

I like the idea of having 20MP, the extra will help with the occasions i have to crop. The reviews are not very positive in general. A high quality used G9 is just a bit too costly for mu budget but I could stretch to the G90 in excellent condition, ad sell the G80. What are peoples thoughts? (stills are my priority)

Being honest and brand agnostic for a moment if focus tracking ability for things like birds in flight is important perhaps it'd be wise to look beyond Panasonic and to take at least a quick look at the Olympus offerings with better focus tracking ability?

20mp wise I have the GX9 and the mini SLR styled G100.

 

[tijuana taxi]

Being honest and brand agnostic for a moment if focus tracking ability for things like birds in flight is important perhaps it'd be wise to look beyond Panasonic and to take at least a quick look at the Olympus offerings with better focus tracking ability?

20mp wise I have the GX9 and the mini SLR styled G100.

Might be negated with the loss of the dual is from his Panasonic lenses.
I thought about suggesting an E-M1 ii until I considered the above.

 

[woof woof]

Might be negated with the loss of the dual is from his Panasonic lenses.
I thought about suggesting an E-M1 ii until I considered the above.

I'm not a great believer in IS as many pictures I take don't need it. I think the most practical use for me would be with longer lenses and slower shutter speeds but would anyone shooting action like birds in flight be using shutter speeds at which IS would help? That's the sort of question I'd consider if deciding if dual IS or even any IS was a necessity or not. It could be that better tracking is more useful.

These are decisions we must make based on usage. As I always recommend... Start at the end picture and work back to decide the kit and the settings.

 

[Stephen L]

I have both the G9 and the GX9. Whilst the GX9 is lighter and more compact, I find it harder to use than the G9 because of this size. I find it rather fiddly, whilst the G9 is just about the best handling mirrorless camera I have owned, and I have owned examples of most makes. Obviously image quality is identical, but if circumstances permit the carrying and use of the larger camera then it’s no contest. I must add that I have absolutely zero interest in video, so cannot comment on this aspect. Nor, indeed, of fast-moving subjects.

 

[Crotal Bell]

I have both the G9 and the GX9. Whilst the GX9 is lighter and more compact, I find it harder to use than the G9 because of this size. I find it rather fiddly, whilst the G9 is just about the best handling mirrorless camera I have owned, and I have owned examples of most makes. Obviously image quality is identical, but if circumstances permit the carrying and use of the larger camera then it’s no contest. I must add that I have absolutely zero interest in video, so cannot comment on this aspect. Nor, indeed, of fast-moving subjects.

"Obviously image quality is identical"

And that's the thing, that's what I care about so can't see the point of adding the extra cost for the G9. I did rea a review that suggested the prcessor in the G90 is not as good as the one in the G9, but I find that hard to believe when the G90 was released 2 years later.
The G90 is more shaped like the G9 so should be less fiddly than than GX9, and I find the G80 very comfortable right now