"Panasonic G series" Owners Thread

Hey dudes, I'm trying to get the best low light performance on the G80. Having the IBIS on board, I was going to try.............
Manual Mode - Wide aperture and choose a slow shutter speed, and put the ISO on auto?
Theory being, the open Aperture and slow Shutter will allow in the light and command the ISO to stay lower and just give enough, but not take over and speed up the shutter.

Does this sound like the right tactic?
 
Crotal Bell said:
Hey dudes, I'm trying to get the best low light performance on the G80. Having the IBIS on board, I was going to try.............
Manual Mode - Wide aperture and choose a slow shutter speed, and put the ISO on auto?
Theory being, the open Aperture and slow Shutter will allow in the light and command the ISO to stay lower and just give enough, but not take over and speed up the shutter.

Does this sound like the right tactic?
Click to expand...

I suppose it depends on the subject, you and the kits ability to stay still and how good the IS is.

In aperture mode there'll probably be a slower shutter speed limit the camera wont want to drop below but you and the kit may be able to cope with a lower shutter speed in Manual mode.

If you're shooting still life you can get away with quite a slow shutter speed, possibly the slowest the IS can cope with but if the subject is likely to move under its own power or in any breeze your shutter speed will need to be high enough to freeze that movement.
 
woof woof said:
I suppose it depends on the subject, you and the kits ability to stay still and how good the IS is.

In aperture mode there'll probably be a slower shutter speed limit the camera wont want to drop below but you and the kit may be able to cope with a lower shutter speed in Manual mode.

If you're shooting still life you can get away with quite a slow shutter speed, possibly the slowest the IS can cope with but if the subject is likely to move under its own power or in any breeze your shutter speed will need to be high enough to freeze that movement.
Click to expand...
Sorry I should have said, still shots, landscapes and still scenes, later in the day and on cloudy dull days.
 
Crotal Bell said:
Sorry I should have said, still shots, landscapes and still scenes, later in the day and on cloudy dull days.
Click to expand...

Outdoors in what passes for daylight in the UK sometimes I have to move out of aperture priority and stick it in manual and dial in a faster shutter speed because the shutter speed has fallen too much but this could be because I pixel peep and want to see leaves well defined and not smeary because they've moved in the breeze. For shots where leaves or anything else likely to move will be too small to define clearly anyway I suppose you could use a slow shutter speed and allow some natural movement in the environment as it wont affect the final image.

I think it might help to at some point compare pictures taken at various ISO's and decide what ISO's you're happy with.
 
Last edited:
I'd be inclined to set the ISO manually as well. One of the (few) drawbacks I've found with the G80 is it can get noisy quickly so a reasonably low ISO is quite important. How about a tripod? This was the G80 at 1.3 seconds, f/2.8 and ISO200 - but it was on a tripod.

51734123083_8c283fe916_c.jpg


In other news I put a bid on for another G80 today at £200 - but got outbid by £5...
 
delb0y said:
I'd be inclined to set the ISO manually as well. One of the (few) drawbacks I've found with the G80 is it can get noisy quickly so a reasonably low ISO is quite important. How about a tripod? This was the G80 at 1.3 seconds, f/2.8 and ISO200 - but it was on a tripod.

In other news I put a bid on for another G80 today at £200 - but got outbid by £5...
Click to expand...

I think this is why it's maybe an idea to try ISO's and see what's acceptable. Some may be happy with ISO's quite a bit higher than 200.

Shame about that bid but bide your time and another may be along :D
 
delb0y said:
I'd be inclined to set the ISO manually as well. One of the (few) drawbacks I've found with the G80 is it can get noisy quickly so a reasonably low ISO is quite important. How about a tripod? This was the G80 at 1.3 seconds, f/2.8 and ISO200 - but it was on a tripod.

51734123083_8c283fe916_c.jpg


In other news I put a bid on for another G80 today at £200 - but got outbid by £5...
Click to expand...
Yeah I should use my tripod more often. I assumed if the Aperture and SS were set for good light then the ISO would automatically have to stay low, but are you suggesting it will often run higher than desired and add more light than necessary? (if you don't lock it in)
 
delb0y said:
I often shoot much higher than 200 ISO - but with a tripod, you don't have to :)

Re. the bid, I think it was fate telling me to wait and get a G9 instead :)
Click to expand...
What ISO is your limit for good acceptable photos on the G89?

I can't stretch to the G9, but been considering the GX9 or Olympus EM1 MkII
 
delb0y said:
I often shoot much higher than 200 ISO - but with a tripod, you don't have to :)

Re. the bid, I think it was fate telling me to wait and get a G9 instead :)
Click to expand...

Well yes but not every subject can be photographed with shutter speeds into the double digits never mind seconds and not everyone wants to carry a tripod about and stick to base ISO.

As Keith is looking at keeping image quality up I thought it might be an idea for him to assess what ISO he finds acceptable. That seems to be a logical starting point to me but hey-ho.

Hope you can catch a camera soon... I have too many and another on the way. It's a slippery slope.
 
Just out of interest the following pictures were taken with a GF1 which is a very early MFT camera at ISO 1,600 and the exposures look accurate enough.

UqaSFH0.jpg


TtiG6jY.jpg


More modern kit should give better results. I would use much higher than 1,600 myself but I suppose we all have some idea of what's ok and what isn't.
 
woof woof said:
Just out of interest the following pictures were taken with a GF1 which is a very early MFT camera at ISO 1,600 and the exposures look accurate enough.

UqaSFH0.jpg


TtiG6jY.jpg


More modern kit should give better results. I would use much higher than 1,600 myself but I suppose we all have some idea of what's ok and what isn't.
Click to expand...
Noting wrong with those, although my real problem is dull cloudy afternoons and low light before sunset.
I still have issues with skies blowing out a lot but that's for another thread.
 
I have a GX9. This is a night time GX80 shot at ISO 8,000 with fill light added.

YLQzmna.jpg


You can see grain in the sky but a bit of processing may improve it.
 
tijuana taxi said:
Its not so simple as ver 1 and 2, there are about four 14-140 lenses.
The most recent one model no H-FSA14140 is the highly rated and most expensive one. Apart from anything else it has gained weather sealing which might make quite a difference to some users. Probably also has dual is 2 on cameras that support it.
Click to expand...
I think it's actually only three. There's the original with MegaOIS from 2009. Not really worth considering these days.
Then there's the improved Power OIS version H-FS14140 from 2013. This gives Dual IS with firmware 1.2.
Finally there's the H-FSA14140 from 2016 which only adds weather sealing to its predecessor.
 
Snapsh0t said:
I think it's actually only three. There's the original with MegaOIS from 2009. Not really worth considering these days.
Then there's the improved Power OIS version H-FS14140 from 2013. This gives Dual IS with firmware 1.2.
Finally there's the H-FSA14140 from 2016 which only adds weather sealing to its predecessor.
Click to expand...
My mistake although care has to be taken because the Power OIS version H-FS14140 had a facelift.
It went from shiny to matt Black and the Red letters HD were removed making it look like the later Mk ii version.
Only sure way to identify the newest version is by the H-FSA14140 model number
 
I'm happy to go to ISO 1200 on the G80. I used a G3 for many years and don't recall ever having issues with ISO and noise so maybe I've just been sucked into the pixel-peeping mindset as I've progressed with this hobby,

I agree about carrying the tripod - I hate it. Most of my photography is done whilst I'm doing something else, if that makes sense - an early morning fishing trip or bike ride at dawn, maybe a cycle ride into town along the canal, or just a walk in the country or a gig in a pub. But once in a rare while I will take myself out on a "proper" photographic expedition and take the tripod - and it's usually a revelation how much better the photos are, especially landscapes and still-lives and low light shots. Obviously for any shots that have some movement in them, then low shutter speeds are not good - unless one wants to blur that movement. Again, now and then I'll take the tripod out along with a Big Stopper filter and try and get some of those long exposure smoothed out movement shots, although I've not really been very successful yet!

Cheers
Derek
 
I recently shot at ISO3200 on my G100 on my holiday and I am very pleased with the results tbh. It was indoors, I was using the 35-100mm and I couldn't drop my shutter speed any more as the subject was moving.
Used topaz denoise AI which cleaned it up beautifully retaining all the details. Overall very good considering I was expecting not be able to shoot over 1600.
Definitely wouldn't go to 6400 myself.

Edit:
I even printed one of them A4 size. No noise seen in my print. this for me personally is the most important part (y)
 
Last edited:
nandbytes said:
Definitely wouldn't go to 6400 myself.
Click to expand...

I'd rather take the picture and see what it looks like than stop taking pictures altogether because a particular ISO has been reached. You can always bin a picture later if it's just too bad. Some artificial lighting can make quite low ISO's look awful though and that to me is a maybe sometimes a bigger worry than low light and higher ISO's.

Just my own views :D

Here you go... the first MFT ISO 25,600 picture I came across. It's just a record shot taken as I got home. ISO 25,600 at 22:12 late January one year so this picture is a lot brighter than you'd see with your eye at that time of night and that time of year. The exposure would need to be dropped to give a more natural view but then I suppose I'd lose even more detail. GX7 and 20mm f1.7.

giuTQ9x.jpg


If that is acceptable or not is a decision for us to make and of course pixel peeping wont give you anything which will be world beating but I think it's ok for what it is and if I wanted to print it I don't think it'd look too bad.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
I'd rather take the picture and see what it looks like than stop taking pictures altogether because a particular ISO has been reached. You can always bin a picture later if it's just too bad. Some artificial lighting can make quite low ISO's look awful though and that to me is a maybe sometimes a bigger worry than low light and higher ISO's.

Just my own views :D

Here you go... the first MFT ISO 25,600 picture I came across. It's just a record shot taken as I got home. ISO 25,600 at 22:12 late January one year so this picture is a lot brighter than you'd see with your eye at that time of night and that time of year. The exposure would need to be dropped to give a more natural view but then I suppose I'd lose even more detail. GX7 and 20mm f1.7.

giuTQ9x.jpg


If that is acceptable or not is a decision for us to make but I think it's ok for what it is and if I wanted to print it I don't think it'd look too bad.
Click to expand...
I agree it is worth taking.
Incredible amount of light for that time of night in January! That's about 5 hours after sunset, and you can still see the colour of the trees in the background.
 
Sangoma said:
I agree it is worth taking.
Incredible amount of light for that time of night in January! That's about 5 hours after sunset, and you can still see the colour of the trees in the background.
Click to expand...

As above, the exposure is really too bright but to get a more natural look it'd need to be a lot darker and then I'd lose the detail.

I stood there shivering until the security light timed out and then took the picture :D
 
I fancied giving a LX100 a try.

I bought one, it came, I set it up and took a test shot...

1-P1080404.jpg

I've initiated a return request :(

It's probably just my bad luck but this is exactly why I'm nervous of buying fixed lens cameras.

PS.
This is a used one off ebay.
 
Nice camera though and in great condition at least externally, there isn't a mark on it and I like the manual controls. Should I risk another? I'm tempted but this fear of significant sensor contamination I have just wont go away now. Oh dear. I'll sadly try and forget the idea and move on.
 
woof woof said:
Nice camera though and in great condition at least externally, there isn't a mark on it and I like the manual controls. Should I risk another? I'm tempted but this fear of significant sensor contamination I have just wont go away now. Oh dear. I'll sadly try and forget the idea and move on.
Click to expand...
Nice, but probably around £300, bit much to pay for dust!
 
Sangoma said:
Nice, but probably around £300, bit much to pay for dust!
Click to expand...

I'll just try and forget the idea of a LX100.

Panasonic seem to have had some severe design and build issues in the past, the GM5 is reportedly (so I was told be the repairer) prone to contamination under the sensor (and that's what mine had,) the LX100 seems prone to sensor contamination and Panasonic (like others) have produced multiple models prone to shutter shock.

I hope they're making an effort to do better.
 
tijuana taxi said:
My mistake although care has to be taken because the Power OIS version H-FS14140 had a facelift.
It went from shiny to matt Black and the Red letters HD were removed making it look like the later Mk ii version.
Only sure way to identify the newest version is by the H-FSA14140 model number
Click to expand...
Agreed. I spotted there were some with HD on and some without when I was trying to pick one which confused me as I didn't know about the facelift. I think we can agree there are 3.5 versions. :)
 
woof woof said:
I'll just try and forget the idea of a LX100.

Panasonic seem to have had some severe design and build issues in the past, the GM5 is reportedly (so I was told be the repairer) prone to contamination under the sensor (and that's what mine had,) the LX100 seems prone to sensor contamination and Panasonic (like others) have produced multiple models prone to shutter shock.

I hope they're making an effort to do better.
Click to expand...
Canon have had problems, Pentax have had problems, no doubt other makes have as well :)

I have a G7, and have not noticed shutter shock, yet I have on some other makes of dSLR (it probably happened on film cameras as well, but just didn't see it)

I got out my TZ1 today, still works as well as it did when I bought it 14 years ago, don't know about dust on the sensor, haven't looked.
 
Going back to all-in-one travel zooms, has anyone tried the Olympus 14-150mm? On paper it looks quite attractive, and not expensive.
 
Sangoma said:
Canon have had problems, Pentax have had problems, no doubt other makes have as well :)

I have a G7, and have not noticed shutter shock, yet I have on some other makes of dSLR (it probably happened on film cameras as well, but just didn't see it)

I got out my TZ1 today, still works as well as it did when I bought it 14 years ago, don't know about dust on the sensor, haven't looked.
Click to expand...
I don’t know if my LX100 has sensor contamination. All I know is that there isn’t any showing on my photos.
 
Sangoma said:
Canon have had problems, Pentax have had problems, no doubt other makes have as well :)

I have a G7, and have not noticed shutter shock, yet I have on some other makes of dSLR (it probably happened on film cameras as well, but just didn't see it)

I got out my TZ1 today, still works as well as it did when I bought it 14 years ago, don't know about dust on the sensor, haven't looked.
Click to expand...

I had a G7 and it most definitely did exhibit shutter shock but as I keep saying all things have to align to display it.

You need... An affected model of camera, a susceptible lens and to be using the mechanical shutter in the affected shutter speed range. Take any one of those things out and you wont see it. I had a GX7 and that displayed SS too.
 
Sangoma said:
I think then it is better to get the Panasonic lens, as some things may not be compatible.
I believe the dual stabilisation is not compatible?
Click to expand...
Yes, I’m always wary of possible present or future incompatibility.
 
Stephen L said:
Going back to all-in-one travel zooms, has anyone tried the Olympus 14-150mm? On paper it looks quite attractive, and not expensive.
Click to expand...
Again I believe that lens has versions 1 and 2, neither are considered to be as good as the newest 14-140 ii.
Personally not impressed with these compact all in one zooms.
I am a proponent of the idea that the Olympus 12-100 is the exception to this rule.
All the others seem to have areas of weakness that I find unacceptable
 
tijuana taxi said:
Again I believe that lens has versions 1 and 2, neither are considered to be as good as the newest 14-140 ii.
Personally not impressed with these compact all in one zooms.
I am a proponent of the idea that the Olympus 12-100 is the exception to this rule.
All the others seem to have areas of weakness that I find unacceptable
Click to expand...
Fair comment, however I would like to hear the weakness of the Panasonic 14-140, then if I come across it, I can plan ahead how to deal with it
 
tijuana taxi said:
Again I believe that lens has versions 1 and 2, neither are considered to be as good as the newest 14-140 ii.
Personally not impressed with these compact all in one zooms.
I am a proponent of the idea that the Olympus 12-100 is the exception to this rule.
All the others seem to have areas of weakness that I find unacceptable
Click to expand...
I am tended to agree with you.
 
Sangoma said:
Fair comment, however I would like to hear the weakness of the Panasonic 14-140, then if I come across it, I can plan ahead how to deal with it
Click to expand...
I'm sure online reviewers have the answer, for me its 14mm not being wide enough.

Cons of the 12-100 are usually size, weight and cost, not performance related.
 
Last edited:
tijuana taxi said:
I'm sure online reviewers have the answer, for me its 14mm not being wide enough.

Cons of the 12-100 are usually size, weight and cost, not performance related.
Click to expand...

Yes, I'm sure they do, but then you can find reviews for just about anything saying whatever you like to hear, so I was hoping to hear what you thought was not good :)

For a general carry around, 14 is OK for me, usually if I want wider, then the whole day is usually wide, so I would use the 7-14. On Canon I used to use the 10-18, and then the 18-135 0r 18-200.

Is the Olympus 12-100 fully compatible in all aspects with Panasonic?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top