Hi folks, just wondered if anyone had any feedback on the Panasonic 8mm f3.5 LUMIX G Fisheye Micro Four Thirds Lens? Went to Lichfield cathedral earlier and had great fun with the 9mm Olympus lens so thought I would look at some more serious options. There is only one that I can see on WEX for my L Mount so thought I'd check out M4/3 options also. Any comments would be great.
"Panasonic G series" Owners Thread
- Thread starter hillwalkinggirl
- Start date
- Messages
- 2,983
- Name
- Steve, Coventry, England
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Looks more like I would expectFollowing on from this morning's post I thought I'd go back to basics. These two were taken in the garden, but the same lens and the same ISO 2000. This time just a single small point AF. Much happier with the sharpness here.
What is it about the G9 you don't like? I have both and love my GX9. They are very similar in terms of output / settings - G9 a higher spec but handling wise completely different. I do wish the GX9 had a slightly deeper grip on it, but I think the G9 feels great in the hand.
- Messages
- 15,778
- Name
- Rich
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Hard to say, i've got both and enjoy using them albeit they are very different.
Up to now I have used the GX9 a lot more, but recently been taking the larger camera out a lot more.
What don't you like about the G9?
Have you ever tried any of the 20mp Olympus cameras?
Last edited:
Stephen L
I asked a Stupid Question Once...
- Messages
- 7,581
- Name
- Stephen
- Edit My Images
- No
I couldn’t get on with mine. Great ergonomics, great IQ, but I couldn’t get attached to it. Moved to the Olympus E-M1iii. Slightly poorer ergonomics but somehow it felt better for me. Go with what feels good to you, don’t be swayed by others but by all means hear their own reasonings. Everyone is different.
- Messages
- 15,778
- Name
- Rich
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Thought you had the E-M5 iii or have I lost track?
I have had all three E-M1's and still prefer the G9 although its the GX9 that invariably goes with me on my travels.
Probably my favourite camera of any I have owned, some of it is sentimental, but mainly because its an excellent camera.
Last edited:
Stephen L
I asked a Stupid Question Once...
- Messages
- 7,581
- Name
- Stephen
- Edit My Images
- No
As well! I actually prefer using the 5 but the 1 has some unique features which I sometimes need.
- Messages
- 562
- Name
- Derek
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I have the GX80 rather than the GX9, and it's a very different beast to the G9. If I'm heading into town, or going out on the bike, it's the smaller GX80 I take. The G9 accompanies me (as the G80 did previously) when I want to use a longer lens - generally the 100-300. I did take the GX80 on holiday with the 35-100 and that lens was fine on the GX80, So it's only the really big lens where I think the G9 is a necessity. For street / urban work I much prefer the smaller footprint of the GX.
- Messages
- 1,029
- Name
- gary
- Edit My Images
- No
I have a gx7 which I have repurchased it just feels better as a walk about camera
most of my shooting is done either whilst dog walking or just wandering in town, the local park or out and about in general, to be honest the g9 was bought on a whim coz it was on offer at John Lewis.
I think i will just cut my losses and sell it
- Messages
- 986
- Name
- Paul
- Edit My Images
- No
Give us a shout/link, if you do decide to sell your G9 (obviously dealing within the forum classified rules)...im in no real rush to get a G9, but it would be nice to upgrade from my G80...........................although, i would like to try a 35-100mm 2.8 lens first. My season, wont get underway until March, so i dont plan on shooting any pics for awhile yet. Cheers Paul.
- Messages
- 1,029
- Name
- gary
- Edit My Images
- No
I will be making a decision in the next couple of weeks. I will give you a heads up when I am listing it
gary
- Messages
- 986
- Name
- Paul
- Edit My Images
- No
Thanks Gary.
Maybe you need to give the G9 a proper outing, a good session for a fair few hours, with a few 100 images captured. Even use it side by side with your other camera, process/compare both sets of images, that way youve given it a good chance...who knows, you may get to like it.
Cheers Paul.
woof woof
I like a nice Chianti
- Messages
- 43,801
- Name
- Alan
- Edit My Images
- No
I like the evf in the corner cameras but I have had a G1, G7 and currently a G100. I like the evf in the corner cameras because they're small but I gather they may not have the focus tracking abilities of the larger cameras or some of the other features. I still like them though as I just take one shot at a time and don't use tracking.
- Messages
- 1,029
- Name
- gary
- Edit My Images
- No
Unfortunately I just don’t feel comfortable using an slr styled camera anymore, it seems much more natural to me, to use a rangefinder style
Stephen L
I asked a Stupid Question Once...
- Messages
- 7,581
- Name
- Stephen
- Edit My Images
- No
A few from my recently-acquired (for next-to nothing) GF2 and Panasonic 14mm f2.5. A lovely pocket combo.
Ben & Jack by Stephen Lee, on Flickr
Ben & Jack by Stephen Lee, on Flickr
Sam by Stephen Lee, on Flickr
Sam's Engine by Stephen Lee, on Flickr
Ben & Jack by Stephen Lee, on Flickr
Ben & Jack by Stephen Lee, on FlickrSam by Stephen Lee, on FlickrSam's Engine by Stephen Lee, on Flickr
Last edited:
Stephen L
I asked a Stupid Question Once...
- Messages
- 7,581
- Name
- Stephen
- Edit My Images
- No
I’m pleasantly surprised by it. Thanks for the reference shots.
- Messages
- 562
- Name
- Derek
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Another pre-dawn walk down by the canal trying to figure out the G9. Today I kept things really simple - AFC, but a very small single point of focus, Had to ramp the ISO up and the shutter speed down because of the lack of light, and kept the aperture as wide as possible, So birds in flight were out, but these two shots were okay. I'm going to have to start going out in better light, but then, of course, you get people out there...
- Messages
- 10,200
- Name
- Brian
- Edit My Images
- Yes
- Messages
- 339
- Name
- Rob
- Edit My Images
- No
Well just thought I’d post a quick update on the GX9 and my use.
As for use, not as much as I’d like but I have managed to get it setup just right I feel.
Haven’t had it out of manual and just seems to work great. Even finding the ex. comp dial fine in use which I gather some find not so great.
Have switched the cursor keys to always move focus box and put everything into the Q Menu.
Im so so on the 12-32. Not so much quality more I want faster!
Was out earlier in the week on a very grey day and even wide open I was struggling to keep shutter speed fast enough to avoid shake. Technique might need some work.
Still intend to get the 20 1.7 but also weighing up the 42.5 for when I fancy a bit more reach or, the 12-35 2.8, but that’s an outlier at present.
A couple of shots from earlier today walking home from work. I’m enjoying L.Monochrome D btw!
As for use, not as much as I’d like but I have managed to get it setup just right I feel.
Haven’t had it out of manual and just seems to work great. Even finding the ex. comp dial fine in use which I gather some find not so great.
Have switched the cursor keys to always move focus box and put everything into the Q Menu.
Im so so on the 12-32. Not so much quality more I want faster!
Was out earlier in the week on a very grey day and even wide open I was struggling to keep shutter speed fast enough to avoid shake. Technique might need some work.
Still intend to get the 20 1.7 but also weighing up the 42.5 for when I fancy a bit more reach or, the 12-35 2.8, but that’s an outlier at present.
A couple of shots from earlier today walking home from work. I’m enjoying L.Monochrome D btw!
- Messages
- 2,983
- Name
- Steve, Coventry, England
- Edit My Images
- Yes
"I was struggling to keep shutter speed fast enough to avoid shake"
Did you actually see signs of shake, or just working by "old theory" ?
Reason I ask is that the stabilisation should give useful advantage. I find I can use 1/15 without too much trouble on the 12-32.
Another possible option is the 12-60 Power OIS, then you can use dual stabilisation, which makes things quite a bit better.
If you are using JPEG, you can set the sharpening and noise reduction as low as it will go, and then you can use one stop faster ISO, and denoise and sharpen with software later, (and always sharpen last of all, watching carefully for any halo or artefacts)
If you are using RAW, you will have that advantage already.
The 20mm 1.7 has quite a few things going for it, and it is the only prime I have kept. (No, not true, I also have kept the 9mm "lens cap", which give surprisingly good results when the distortion is corrected, and is also very small)
- Messages
- 339
- Name
- Rob
- Edit My Images
- No
No. Noticed it in the files.
The condition/light was atrocious though and if I recall shutter speeds were slower than 1/30.
Equally could be me getting used to the smaller body.
I will have a look at the 12-60 but think I’ll go with the primes first.
As for Raw/Jpg. I only shoot raw. Habit more than anything and the files were no good imo.
I’ll keep playing. Doesn’t detract from the camera just more than likely poor conditions on the day.
- Messages
- 562
- Name
- Derek
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I'm yet to be really convinced about the stabilisation - this on the G80, the GX80, and the G9. In the reviews we read about three, four, or even five stops of stabilisation, but I'm always very wary. My shooting always seems to be in low-light at the moment, and therefore I also seem to be down at 1/30th or 1/15th and there's always a lack of sharpness. In the defence of IS I've never scientifically set out to see if it's something else, so I'm likely to be talking rubbish.
Regarding the 12-32, I love that lens! I use it on the little GM1, for which I think it was designed, and I've always been amazed at the results. That said, when I'm out with that camera it tends to be when I'm cycling which tends to mean daylight, and thus the light is better.
Derek
Regarding the 12-32, I love that lens! I use it on the little GM1, for which I think it was designed, and I've always been amazed at the results. That said, when I'm out with that camera it tends to be when I'm cycling which tends to mean daylight, and thus the light is better.
Derek
woof woof
I like a nice Chianti
- Messages
- 43,801
- Name
- Alan
- Edit My Images
- No
I don't tend to use slow shutter speeds because the world and things in it tend to move and I'm mostly therefore going to want to freeze that movement, The architectural pictures above probably could be taken with a slow shutter speed and IS but for many subjects and scenarios slow shutter speeds and even IS aren't really needed.
I remember I once took a 20mm shot (this was with FF) at 1 second handheld and it was ok. I couldn't do that every time and IS would certainly up the odds of being able to do it but outside of truly static shots or when deliberately trying to capture movement like silky water shots I don't see slow shutter speeds or IS as being all that useful.
I remember I once took a 20mm shot (this was with FF) at 1 second handheld and it was ok. I couldn't do that every time and IS would certainly up the odds of being able to do it but outside of truly static shots or when deliberately trying to capture movement like silky water shots I don't see slow shutter speeds or IS as being all that useful.
- Messages
- 339
- Name
- Rob
- Edit My Images
- No
Don’t get me wrong. I am happy with the lens it just wasn’t up to the conditions on that day without a tripod which I didn’t have. Otherwise I’m decent light it’s been spot on.
No. I like to keep shutter up also. Indeed the shots a pice from a different day were and posed no issue.
Thaw day in question though was a tripod/not bother/faster lens day!
- Messages
- 3,616
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- Yes
So the Pana Leica 100-400mm arrived today, used but in good condition, nice and clean, only the tripod mount shows use on the base, to be expected.
A few shots out the bedroom window, and the burst rate seems to have increased with the Power OIS.
The zoom is stiff, on one occasion I thought it was at 400mm but it wasn't, it had just hit a slight sticky point and then I realised I had not turned it all the way through. But I am not worried about this, just need to get used to being a bit firmer with this lens compared to the 100-300mm Mega OIS.
A few shots out the bedroom window, and the burst rate seems to have increased with the Power OIS.
The zoom is stiff, on one occasion I thought it was at 400mm but it wasn't, it had just hit a slight sticky point and then I realised I had not turned it all the way through. But I am not worried about this, just need to get used to being a bit firmer with this lens compared to the 100-300mm Mega OIS.
- Messages
- 15,778
- Name
- Rich
- Edit My Images
- Yes
This is a demonstration of the GX9 IBIS effectiveness I posted on another website.
G9 is even better, some people suspect a faulty IBIS module, who knows?.
Both taken with exactly the same settings barely a minute apart. (15mm, 1/4 sec, iso200, f/2.8)
With
Without
- Messages
- 339
- Name
- Rob
- Edit My Images
- No
Pretty easy to see the benefit.
I don’t doubt my ibis was/is working i honestly think it was just the conditions and probably me needing to adapt to the small camera vs the much bigger X-T4 which I can get a good two handed grip on.
- Messages
- 15,778
- Name
- Rich
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I have had my GX9 pretty much since it was launched and never had a problem with the IBIS.
Admittedly the G9 is maybe a stop or so better, but both give me a decent advantage.
Only reason I left Fuji was when they said they wouldn't ever make a camera with IBIS, they lied and did exactly the opposite.
Bit late by then once I had sold all my gear, its very important to me and my shaky hands, no going back now.
Besides which I really like my GX9 although I disliked that 12-32, if you keep the GX9 perhaps consider the Olympus 12-45 f/4.
Really works well with it, all I use now for my travels along with the 9mm/1.7 and occasionally the 15/1.7.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 339
- Name
- Rob
- Edit My Images
- No
No doubt I will be. I’m really enjoying the little thing. Has met my intended use perfectly and allowing me to play around will subjects such as those above which I’d other not do because I just wouldn’t have had a camera with me due to the X-T4s size.
Just need to decide on lens choices going forward.
I’m still leaning towards the 20mm but lack of AFF/C support is putting me off slightly so need to consider options to compare. In reality it may be a non issue.
Then the 42.5mm as a longer compliment.
I’m in no rush though so have time to keep weighing up options.
Realistically I only got the kit with 12-32 as I had a set of circumstances that meant it made more sense financially than getting a used body and the 20 1.7 as in cheaper and that’s what matters!
It has though given me a chance to get used to the body without getting put off with a potential wrong focal length choice.
- Messages
- 2,983
- Name
- Steve, Coventry, England
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Silly question, you did have the lock ring released?
Probably hasn't been used much
- Messages
- 3,616
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Yeah lock ring released.Silly question, you did have the lock ring released?
Probably hasn't been used much
It's pretty much what I expected really, most reviewers call it a stiff lens, so I just need to adapt to it needing a firmer turn that the 100-300mm
Certainly feels a solid lump of glass, can't wait to get out tomorrow and give it a whirl !
I have heard it's best set at F8 but others say it makes little or no real difference.
- Messages
- 562
- Name
- Derek
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Did you trade in the 100-300? I quite fancy the 400, but can't really justify both. There again, I can't really justify more expenditure at the mo'.