"Panasonic G series" Owners Thread

Well, they are very different things.

I am a little surprised at how much positive weight some give to OVF's. I find my G1's EVF is actually probably better than an APS-C OVF in all but almost total darkness. Plus with the EVF you get WYSIWYG and a lovely in view histogram.

I'm not too sure that Canon DSLR's are more robust. Certainly not with regard to dust and debris in the VF and on the sensor. MFT is light years ahead of Canon and Canon look like some low tech thing from the 1970's compared to the more modern tech of Panny and others in this regard.

If the Panny system had lens technology like Canon / Sigma USM / HSM instead of the awful (IMVHO) FBW I'd probably love the system. Even so I've dropped APS-C DSLR now and have MFT and FF. APS-C DSLR's seem a little pointless to me now, less IQ than FF and not as compact, portable or discrete as MFT.
 
To give some less-biased balance to the APS-C bashing....I do agree that EVFs just don't have the amazing qualities that some people seem to feel.

I've used several including older implementations in Canon Powershot Bridge cameras, Lumix G2, Fuji X100 and an NEX-7 recently and all of them, although obviously improving with technology, make the view feel somewhat 'remote' to me. I agree that it's nice to have information right in front of you but my decrepid, pointless ;0) 40D still shows me all I need to see in the VF (exposure, shutter, Aperture and focus confirmation).

With regards to being robust, I've had several DSLRs take a bashing on tripods/mud/waterfall spray shooting landscapes and they've all survived. Although I only used a G2 for one day around Chester Zoo as a Panasonic trial day, my initial feeling was that I wouldn't want to drop it or the lenses (the same goes for my GF1 although the metal body feels stronger than the G2 did). Not sure I understand why there is a difference between APS-C and M4/3 when it comes to dust/debris when they're both interchangeable lens systems except one doesn't have a mirror in front of the sensor?

I do however agree with the terrible focus by wire systems on both M4/3 lenses and the X100 but the only manual focussing I do is with legacy or CCTV lenses which are designed for manual focus. I also agree that APS-C has different IQ to FF but to be fair the crop factor of APS-C arguably makes them better for long wildlife so '1 all'? ;0)

Back to the OP, my overall feeling is that both systems will get you good family pictures but one will be considerably heavier!

Cheers
Steve
 
You've only just got the G3, haven't you? Have you even given it a proper chance yet?

I'm not going to wade into the argument anyway. It's entirely personal opinion and what's good for one person may not be good for another. You, as the user of the camera, need to decide what you want out of your photography and then choose the camera that fulfils that requirement.
They are both very capable bodies, but obviously each has it's own strengths and weaknesses.
 
stevelmx5 said:
To give some less-biased balance to the APS-C bashing....I do agree that EVFs just don't have the amazing qualities that some people seem to feel.
Click to expand...

Nobody is bashing APS-C as such, it's just that in the opinion of some APS-C in DSLR's is being squeezed from both ends. It can not match the IQ of FF and yet has much of the bulk, bulk which MFT has avoided. This does not mean that your 40D is decrepid or pointless, no more so than my 20D, but time marches on and different options are now available.

I still can't fully relate to comments like "remoteness" in the EVF v OVF debate. The image is there to be visualised. Yes, with live view you're viewing a digital representation of the world but this is what you do when you view a digital image either on screen or in print. Is that really so much worse than viewing a reduced field of view image that's been bounced around mirrors and through pieces of plastic and glass each reducing the light transfer in a DSLR and isn't actually the image that you actually capture?

As you asked about dust and debris. I've used SLR's and DSLR's for decades now and they've all suffered from debris in the optical path, some even from new. MFT may not be immune to these nasties but they certainly seem to be more resistant. They obviously, as you point out, don't have the flapping mirror mechanism which is capable of shedding fragments and lubricant some of which will probably end up on the image sensor, remember that the manufacturers have recognised that most sensor contaminants are internally generated. Plus MFT doesn't have the pentaprism or pentamirror assembly, susceptable to contaminants as it is.

Back in the bad old days when I worked for a living I spent decades fixing "stuff" and I can tell you that optical equipment is very prone and very susceptible to contaminants which once there have to be physically removed. Ever tried to thoroughly clean an optical system? It's a bit like dusting your TV at home, move a duster across it and watch as the dust settles again. An electronic system can be much more robust. "All" you need is a capture device, something which both DSLR's and mirrorless systems have to have, connecting circuitry and connectivity which is pretty robust and relatively immune to debris and any which is present will not be visible to the user anyway, and a display. Keeping contaminants out of the display during manufacture is the challenge but assuming that you can do that what you then have is a display with no contamination visible and as long as it's sealed that's how it should stay for quite some time. The optical paths is DSLR's could never be as sealed to contaminants as an electronic system.

Anyway. Sorry to bore you all but the question of robustness was asked.

Actually, as a former engineer it's the almost casual and almost agricultural nature of mechanical DSLR's that gets to me sometimes. The design basically hasn't changed for decades and everytime I raise my DSLR to my eye and look though it I see little specks and that offends me, a little :( :)
 
Last edited:
Fair point about the IQ drop from FF to APS-C with little benefit in bulk although the actual mechanism is the same, just size of the sensor is different so I guess there isn't much to reduce? Arguably, it could be said that FF bodies are unnecessarily large considering that they don't actually hold anything different mechanically but just have to house a larger sensor!

I can see how APS-C can be smaller though with the likes of the Sony SLT bodies using translucent mirrors and NEX dropping the mirror entirely showing that it can be done so just need to see Canon bring out their own (EF-S mount) CSC (ignoring the optical issues inherent with that!) :)

My 'remote' comment is basically because the EVF's on all of the bodies I've used feel to me like I may as well just be looking at the screen on the back of the body through an eyepiece. I think it's the pixelation (even on the NEX-7) that gives me that feel. I fully agree that having information in front is good and, in the case of the X100, the Parellax correction is a bonus but there's still something more appealing to using an OVF (even one that doesn't give 100% coverage). I know this is entirely psychological and that over the next few years OVF's will be lost completely as in compacts but for the time being I personally prefer an optical viewfinder and if I want a digital I would use a loupe on the 3" screen instead!

Cheers
Steve
 
What gets me also is the delay when taking a pic with the G3. If I waited for the picture to clear I could miss a shot! Great comments above guys. Thanks. Just got to decide now what to do. Maybe I should try out the G3 a bit more I guess.
 
Do you mean the review of the picture you've just taken? Some cameras have the option to turn that off, buy I haven't checked my G series to see if it can be done though.
I think that as you've got the G3 in hand already you should at least give it a decent test before dumping it completely. If you get rid without properly trying it out, you'll always be wondering whether you've made the right choice.
 
Mandoo said:
Do you mean the review of the picture you've just taken? Some cameras have the option to turn that off, buy I haven't checked my G series to see if it can be done though.
I think that as you've got the G3 in hand already you should at least give it a decent test before dumping it completely. If you get rid without properly trying it out, you'll always be wondering whether you've made the right choice.
Click to expand...

Setup-->Auto Review-->off on a G1
 
Just taken delivery of a Panasonic/Leica 25mm f/1.4.

Seems very sharp and of course that wide aperture great for available light.

This taken today at f/1.6 on a G1:


Flow - a floating artwork on the Tyne-4 by martsharm, on Flickr


Really the G1 is such a great camera, apart from a slight restriction of dynamic range in ridiculously tricky conditions, it's got a fantastic sensor, very sharp especially with the 25mm. The JPG engine is a bit primitive, but the raws are lovely. It's now fallen out of favour a bit with the G3 and its bigger sensor, but there's nowt wrong with the G1's performance. And the dedicated controls are excellent, especially the focus mode dial which gets used a great deal. Very happy with it.

A landscape shot (this is so sharp you can see the individual rivets in the Tyne bridge!):


Tyne bridges by martsharm, on Flickr
 
Seriously, the LVF-2 is worth a try - you can easily detach it and keep it in your pocket and its so quick to slip onto the camera when you need it - it's big and bright and tilts - a really great addition to the GX1, you just need to shop around - Mathers usually offer it for a fair price - better than Amazon etc.

sound_system said:
Any of the G-series lot shot with an X100. I've had the GX1 all of 5 minutes and I'm getting tempted to stray.

I love the images the camera produces. I have severe reservations about it in bright sunlight as I couldn't see a bloody thing on the screen. In addition I really miss holding a camera to my eye, the screen doesn't cut it for me.

I know the EVF is available but it's expensive and spoils the shape and size of the GX1.

I'm just wondering about the X100 to replace my GX1, 14mm and 20mm.

Anyone with experience of both?
Click to expand...
 
You guys do know that AF on the Fuji's is a lot slower than on micro 4/3 right? IQ on the Fujis is sublime, when matched with a good lens of course - Leica quality in fact, but at an almost Leica price...

woof woof said:
I haven't tried them, no stock locally, but I too am tempted by the X100 or more possibly by an X Pro 1 with 35mm f1.4 as I'm not too keen on the lens on the X100. There is a patent on the rumour site which seems to show a Panny GF body with a built in VF and in body IS. I'd buy that in a flash even if there was no IQ or DR improvement over my G1 but my patience with Panny is running out. Those Fuji's are a bit bigger though, size comparison here...

http://camerasize.com/compare/

Incidentally, I personally had no problem with my GF1 even in direct sunlight, but shooting with the screen just isn't for me.
Click to expand...
 
Yes, it's a great lens, I agree - very nice indeed for portraits and sharp enough even wide open. Kind of a shame they don't make it in black that's all. But hats off to Oly - good value for sure.

Galaxy66 said:
Just got to say the 45mm Olympus is sharp!!
Click to expand...
 
Anyone here got the Panasonic 14-42 X power zoom? My dad's thinking of getting one for his GF3 in order to keep the package small. It's not my cup of tea, I really only use primes, so I've no experience with this lens. There are of course some reports of defective lenses with various sharpness problems, but I wonder if anyone here has suffered these problems in practice or is it just an internet rumour?
 
It's not a rumour - over on DPR forums users have posted images clearly showing that at 1/200 there seems to be a problem with double images and blurryness. It's not clear if this issue can be addressed by a firmware revision or not.

If you purchase from a good dealer you might be able to test it out and return it if you have the problem I guess. Amazon are good like that.

martsharm said:
Anyone here got the Panasonic 14-42 X power zoom? My dad's thinking of getting one for his GF3 in order to keep the package small. It's not my cup of tea, I really only use primes, so I've no experience with this lens. There are of course some reports of defective lenses with various sharpness problems, but I wonder if anyone here has suffered these problems in practice or is it just an internet rumour?
Click to expand...
 
Just to say guys that I got my £50 cashback through for my 20mm lens the other week. I got a cheque as was not sure if paypal would incur charges. When I filled out the form online, I accidentally put the sales despatch note rather than a proper invoice with date of purchase on it. They still accepted the claim with no issues. Shame the G2 was not included on the cashback deal, but I still managed to get it for £185 after discounts from Tesco, and the 20mm for just over £200 after all discounts.

I have used the G2 a tiny bit. Mainly with the 20mm. I can see me using this lens a lot actually. It's a good focal length as a walk about prime, being 40 equivalent. I can see the justified hype now. I'll admit I literally just picked the camera up and started to have a play so no idea of the detailed menu settings here really other than that I was probably in apature priority mode close to wide open in my dingy lounge straight out of the camera jpeg.


P1000102.JPG






martsharm said:
Anyone here got the Panasonic 14-42 X power zoom? My dad's thinking of getting one for his GF3 in order to keep the package small. It's not my cup of tea, I really only use primes, so I've no experience with this lens. There are of course some reports of defective lenses with various sharpness problems, but I wonder if anyone here has suffered these problems in practice or is it just an internet rumour?
Click to expand...

I have read some reviews of the lens saying that it is softer than the 14-42 normal kit lens, which is a shame. Before you ask for links, I cannot remember where I read this. Some of them were on amazon reviews (not sure if .co.uk or .com) and I think some on dpreview.
 
Last edited:
My G1 died today :'(:'(:'(:'(

It says that the memory card is locked, I tried another card and got the same thing so I suppose it's a fault in the card slot :'(

Has anyone had this before and had it fixed? If so how mucho?

At the mo I'm thinking that I'll probably have to accept that it's dead and buy another, a G2 or a g3...
 
Just fixed it :D with the use of a long thin bladed knife.

I'm always very careful when inserting cards but I did read somewhere that the life of these slots is very low but I forget the actual insertion mumber, I just remember thinking "Jeez that's low."

I think I'll leave the card in the camera and use a USB lead from now on.
 
woof woof said:
Just fixed it :D with the use of a long thin bladed knife.

I'm always very careful when inserting cards but I did read somewhere that the life of these slots is very low but I forget the actual insertion mumber, I just remember thinking "Jeez that's low."

I think I'll leave the card in the camera and use a USB lead from now on.
Click to expand...

I've never heard of a life given to a memory card slot based on the number of inserts. What kind of number did you think you remember seeing? In the 100s? 1000s?
 
clicktor said:
I've never heard of a life given to a memory card slot based on the number of inserts. What kind of number did you think you remember seeing? In the 100s? 1000s?
Click to expand...

Yes, memory card slots have an expected insertion life. If you think about it it's obvious that a connection can only be made and broken a certain number of times before the connecting parts suffer some mechanical wear. Even cable connectors in electrical and electronic items have a life too but to be honest sometimes for internal connections it doesn't really matter as once the connection is made it probably wont be broken again during the life of the item.

I remember back in my computer days some had a life expectancy in the dozens which was a PITA as they suffered so many connection problems and needed a lot of reseating. It's not that bad these days with card slots but I wont commit myself to a number I can't quite remember at the moment so I'll keep quiet for now until I've done a bit of Googling to see if I can find a figure.

Of course just as an SD card slot has a life, so does a USB socket :eek: :D
 
I've just checked with a supplier I used to use (I'm retired now :D) and they have a couple of SD card slots each with a mating cycle of 10,000.

10,000 doesn't seem bad but I have to say that that's not the figure I remember. I remember reading a much lower figure. The only way of knowing for sure is to check the data sheet for the specific one Panny use.
 
Finally remembered to sort out the cashback for my lumix goodies :shrug:

Anyone know if I opt to have the cashback paid into PayPal - will I incur charges? The t&c's says charge may be incurred.

Should have 200 quid coming :thumbs:
 
Anyone else got the leather case on their GX1? fits the 20mm, 14mm and 14-42mm PZ.

DMW-CGK13E-K
dmwcgk13ek-20120404-165227.gif


Mathers are doing it free at the moment with a GX1 - worth £55 apparently :eek:
 
bl0at3r said:
Anyone else got the leather case on their GX1? fits the 20mm, 14mm and 14-42mm PZ.

DMW-CGK13E-K

Mathers are doing it free at the moment with a GX1 - worth £55 apparently :eek:
Click to expand...
I have the equivalent for my GF2, it's a little fugly due to bulk, but does what is says on the tin, and doesn't complain about me leaving adaptors/filters on the 14mm or 20mm :thumbs:
 
i am contemplating the larger lens for the G1
45-200?
i have the 14-45 which is good
how does the larger lens rate....please?
 
mrtoad said:
i am contemplating the larger lens for the G1
45-200?
i have the 14-45 which is good
how does the larger lens rate....please?
Click to expand...

I've been very happy with my 45-200 lens. I've not had any problems with the sharpness at any length and its been good value for the price I paid. It moves freely and I've not had any focusing issues at all.
It's my most used lens at the moment because I've been doing a lot of wildlife and zoo photography lately, but it compliments the 14-45 quite nicely, I think.

Edit : I can't post a link as I'm on the iPad at the moment, but I've got a thread titled Hatfield Forest in the critique section that has a few of my G1/45-200 shots in it.
 
Last edited:
Mandoo said:
I've been very happy with my 45-200 lens. I've not had any problems with the sharpness at any length and its been good value for the price I paid. It moves freely and I've not had any focusing issues at all.
It's my most used lens at the moment because I've been doing a lot of wildlife and zoo photography lately, but it compliments the 14-45 quite nicely, I think.

Edit : I can't post a link as I'm on the iPad at the moment, but I've got a thread titled Hatfield Forest in the critique section that has a few of my G1/45-200 shots in it.
Click to expand...

will look that up right away

' ere wigo
thanks
 
I read on another forum that there are reports of banding noise on the new Oly OM thingy when used with the Panny 20mm f1.7. It seems strange that a lens could cause noise but that's what some seem to be saying... :thinking:
 
mrtoad said:
i am contemplating the larger lens for the G1
45-200?
i have the 14-45 which is good
how does the larger lens rate....please?
Click to expand...
I'm happy with mine, not sure if you're familiar with canikon but it seems close in build and optical quality to the 55-200VR/55-250IS, although it's slightly more expensive than these.

I'm not that into zooms, bought mine as I thought I'd need one at some point... loaned it to a friend recently who's got an m43 as a trade up from a bridge, and he seems to really like the lens, has got some good shots with it so far.
 
woof woof said:
I read on another forum that there are reports of banding noise on the new Oly OM thingy when used with the Panny 20mm f1.7. It seems strange that a lens could cause noise but that's what some seem to be saying... :thinking:
Click to expand...



Link?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top