"Panasonic G series" Owners Thread

[arad85]

I've got a legacy lens question if someone can help. Am I right in thinking that with a crop factor of 2, my G1 will turn an 85mm f2.8 into a 170mm f5.6?

Thanks

No, it's gained a FOV similar to a 170mm f2.8 ( max aperture remains the same)

Not quite the full answer. It has the same field of view and "speed" as a 170mm f2.8 lens, but will give the equivalent depth of field of the 170mm lens set to f5.6 on a full frame camera.

Put another way, if you take a photo on a u4/3 camera with an 85mm lens set at f2.8 and take the same (i.e. from the same spot of the same subject) photo on a full frame camera with a 170mm lens set to f5.6 and then print them to the same size, the depth of field will be pretty much the same.

 

[Dave *]

Not quite the full answer. It has the same field of view and "speed" as a 170mm f2.8 lens, but will give the equivalent depth of field of the 170mm lens set to f5.6 on a full frame camera.

Put another way, if you take a photo on a u4/3 camera with an 85mm lens set at f2.8 and take the same (i.e. from the same spot of the same subject) photo on a full frame camera with a 170mm lens set to f5.6 and then print them to the same size, the depth of field will be pretty much the same.

But DOF wasn't asked about, my reply answered the question, the max aperture doesn't change with crop, an f2.8 lens is stil an f2.8 lens, no matter the crop factor.

 

[arad85]

But DOF wasn't asked about, my reply answered the question, the max aperture doesn't change with crop, an f2.8 lens is stil an f2.8 lens, no matter the crop factor.

And an 85mm lens is still an 85mm lens, no matter the crop factor. The question of DOF was implied, just as the question about field of view was implied.

People often talk about a lens on CSCs acting as a longer focal length and narrower aperture equivalent. The reason they do is because it gives the field of view and depth of field as if the equivalent lens were used to take a picture on FF. The physical properties of the lens don't change, but their effect on the resultant picture does.

 

[acs]

Does anyone noise filters with their m4/3 lenses not sure whether to look at screw in on square kits

Go square so you have the option of using grads.

If it was my only system I'd take a look at the Lee RF-75 system. Not sure on the widest angle these will go to but a lot more compact than the 100s or even 85s.

 

[woof woof]

One thing that most don't seem to take into account when considering DoF equivalence is that there's still scope for shallow DoF (getting shallow DoF is what most people seem to be talking about) by changing your framing and/or camera to subject distance.

If you want shallower DoF from a smaller sensor and a wider lens (that's what it boils down to) you can get it by using a longer lens or reducing your camera to subject distance. If you're willing to do that.

 

[arad85]

One thing that most don't seem to take into account when considering DoF equivalence is that there's still scope for shallow DoF (getting shallow DoF is what most people seem to be talking about) by changing your framing and/or camera to subject distance.

Yup. 100%. But humans are lazy...

TBH, having spent some time with some manual focus primes on the G3, I think having a single focal length on the camera makes you think so much more about what you are capturing. The fact that primes can have better (i.e. less) DoF is just a bonus.

 

[rugeyes]

Thanks for the feedback everyone. I'm going to get an old manual focus lens and I'll feed back my results when I've had a play.

 

[rugeyes]

Yup. 100%. But humans are lazy...

TBH, having spent some time with some manual focus primes on the G3, I think having a single focal length on the camera makes you think so much more about what you are capturing. The fact that primes can have better (i.e. less) DoF is just a bonus.

I agree. With both my zooms I tend to either leave the zoom totally in or totally out, I very rarely bother with anything in the middle, not sure why but I prefer to move about. The manual focus prices are so cheap I thought I'd give them a go. Anyone used rockycameras.com? Any suggestions on the mount of lens (clearly I'm going to have to get an adapter so I don't suppose it really matters)?

 

[arad85]

Any suggestions on the mount of lens (clearly I'm going to have to get an adapter so I don't suppose it really matters)?

I asked the same question here: http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=411204

I ended up with a Pentax K mount for £8 delivered from ebay but still have no lenses and an OM mount and 28/2.8 and 50/1.8 OM lenses off here for £44 delivered. That foray into manual focus primes has now cost me £400 for a panny 25mm f/1.4 and thinking about another £200+ for the 45mm Olympus...

 

[PrinceCorum]

Note to anyone thinking of getting G5 as soon as it hits shelves - think carefully ! I have had mine for 5 days or so now, and I'm in two minds about it. I sold off my G3 to part fund the purchase, and have kept my GH1, GX1 and E-P2. I prefer the 12MP sensor at low ISO - OK itlacks a bit of DR but the old 12MP sensor seems to have better resolution to my eyes, at base ISO. High ISO on the G5 seems a bit worse than on my GX1 - possibly a bit cleaner, but with more smudging of fine detail,both in JPEG and Raw (via Silkypix as ACR and LR have not been updated). The color is also, for me, a bit of a step back. I found the GX1 to be very neutral and to be fairly immune to the old Panasonic magenta casts that dogged some of my GF1 and G1 images. I think the magenta cast might be back with the G5, but I need to test this more :-(

The body is OK - build is reasonable but below that of my GX1. I hate the rear scroll wheel in particular - it feels flimsy and looks cheap compared to the other controls.

The new LCD is nice - I can now finally, check the accuracy of focusing properly on a G series camera.

Focus is very fast but not noticeably faster than my GX1.

Have not tested video yet or done much low ISO shooting.

Overall, I prefer shooting with my GX1 - like the feel of that camera more, and like the output better. I just wish the GX1 had that new 920k LCD.

So if you already have a G3 or GX1 you migth want to think twice before rushing to get a G5 - I decided to be an early adopter on this occasion but I think I should probably have waited for the GH3 or just kept my G3..

 

[arad85]

Interesting... and thanks for posting your thoughts.

Note to anyone thinking of getting G5 as soon as it hits shelves - think carefully ! I have had mine for 5 days or so now, and I'm in two minds about it. I sold off my G3 to part fund the purchase, and have kept my GH1, GX1 and E-P2. I prefer the 12MP sensor at low ISO -

Which 12MPix sensor? The G3 and GX1 both use the same 16Mpix sensor.

High ISO on the G5 seems a bit worse than on my GX1 - possibly a bit cleaner, but with more smudging of fine detail,both in JPEG and Raw (via Silkypix as ACR and LR have not been updated).

Is this processing images from the GX1 and G5 through exactly the same RAW convertor or is this comparing G5 with Silkypix and GX1 with Adobe?

The color is also, for me, a bit of a step back. I found the GX1 to be very neutral and to be fairly immune to the old Panasonic magenta casts that dogged some of my GF1 and G1 images. I think the magenta cast might be back with the G5, but I need to test this more :-(

Again, is this the same difference when processing GX1 through the same RAW convertor as G5?

The body is OK - build is reasonable but below that of my GX1. I hate the rear scroll wheel in particular - it feels flimsy and looks cheap compared to the other controls.

Is it less "positive" than either G3 or GX1 scroll wheel? I can see in pictures of the body, it appears to be a lighter grey than other parts of the body which might contribute to a cheap feel.

 

[PrinceCorum]

I haven't done any scientific a versus b testing (yet) so for now I have just shot G5 raw and processed using Silkypix with all NR and sharpening off, before pulling the TIFF into CS5 for Topaz DeNoise. So it's just a subjective assessment of the G5 high ISO raws versus those from the G3 and GX1 via LR4 - I know full well that LR4 will do a better job with the G5 raws.

However, Silkypix actually often produces the best color IMHO so the fact that I am seeing a return of the dreaded Panasonic magenta cast on some G5 outdoor landscapes doen't bode well...

I mean the original 12MP micro 4/3 sensor - I still have a E-P2 with that sensor and I have 1000s of images from my G1 and GF1. There is a crispness to base ISO images from that sensor that I never replicated with G3 and now G5 raws at base ISO.

The rear scroll wheel, in use, is actually better than the GX1 one, in as much as I am not accidentally pressing it in as much as I do on my GX1. But god, it looks and feels cheap - honestly, it looks like it belongs on something made by Hasbro or Mattell Corp.

I reserve final judgement on the G5 until I can use LR4 with the raws and until I can do proper controlled comparisons with my GH1 and GX1.

Incidentally, I am not alone in noticing some of the high ISO issues - over on Imaging Resource on their G5 preview you can clearly see some examples where the G3 retains more detail but is also a bit more noisy than the G5. There seems to be some on-chip raw NR going on with G5 raws that is smidging fine detail at high ISO - at least, when using Silkypix.

Interesting... and thanks for posting your thoughts.

Which 12MPix sensor? The G3 and GX1 both use the same 16Mpix sensor.


Is this processing images from the GX1 and G5 through exactly the same RAW convertor or is this comparing G5 with Silkypix and GX1 with Adobe?

Again, is this the same difference when processing GX1 through the same RAW convertor as G5?

Is it less "positive" than either G3 or GX1 scroll wheel? I can see in pictures of the body, it appears to be a lighter grey than other parts of the body which might contribute to a cheap feel.

 

[ShrubMonkey]

Note to anyone thinking of getting G5 as soon as it hits shelves - think carefully ! I have had mine for 5 days or so now, and I'm in two minds about it. I sold off my G3 to part fund the purchase, and have kept my GH1, GX1 and E-P2. I prefer the 12MP sensor at low ISO - OK itlacks a bit of DR but the old 12MP sensor seems to have better resolution to my eyes, at base ISO. High ISO on the G5 seems a bit worse than on my GX1 - possibly a bit cleaner, but with more smudging of fine detail,both in JPEG and Raw (via Silkypix as ACR and LR have not been updated). The color is also, for me, a bit of a step back. I found the GX1 to be very neutral and to be fairly immune to the old Panasonic magenta casts that dogged some of my GF1 and G1 images. I think the magenta cast might be back with the G5, but I need to test this more :-(

The body is OK - build is reasonable but below that of my GX1. I hate the rear scroll wheel in particular - it feels flimsy and looks cheap compared to the other controls.

The new LCD is nice - I can now finally, check the accuracy of focusing properly on a G series camera.

Focus is very fast but not noticeably faster than my GX1.

Have not tested video yet or done much low ISO shooting.

Overall, I prefer shooting with my GX1 - like the feel of that camera more, and like the output better. I just wish the GX1 had that new 920k LCD.

So if you already have a G3 or GX1 you migth want to think twice before rushing to get a G5 - I decided to be an early adopter on this occasion but I think I should probably have waited for the GH3 or just kept my G3..

Hmm, just ordered a G5 body from Panasonic, mainly down to the Panasonic e-Shop offer and wanting to replace my G3 (hate the handling so much).

 

[PrinceCorum]

Well the handling is improved - G5 is bigger, has that front control toggle and a much better LCD.

It's just IQ that doesn't (IMHO) seem better than G3, and is possibly worse at high ISO...

Hmm, just ordered a G5 body from Panasonic, mainly down to the Panasonic e-Shop offer and wanting to replace my G3 (hate the handling so much).

 

[arad85]

Incidentally, I am not alone in noticing some of the high ISO issues - over on Imaging Resource on their G5 preview you can clearly see some examples where the G3 retains more detail but is also a bit more noisy than the G5. There seems to be some on-chip raw NR going on with G5 raws that is smidging fine detail at high ISO - at least, when using Silkypix.

I have to say that's probably the raw -> JPEG processor doing something akin to the JPEG in camera - even with "all processing switched off" the convertor still has to do something to the image. The SOOC JPEGs look slightly better (at ISO 1600) from the G5 than from the GX1 to me.

What do G3/GX1 RAWs through SilkyPix with the same processing you're applying to the G5 images look like?

 

[PrinceCorum]

I haven't shot side-by-sides yet, but over the next few days I will !

p.s. - I am not exporting JPEGs from Silkypix - I am exporting TIFFs, so there is no JPEG compression going on

I have to say that's probably the raw -> JPEG processor doing something akin to the JPEG in camera - even with "all processing switched off" the convertor still has to do something to the image. The SOOC JPEGs look slightly better (at ISO 1600) from the G5 than from the GX1 to me.

What do G3/GX1 RAWs through SilkyPix with the same processing you're applying to the G5 images look like?

 

[arad85]

p.s. - I am not exporting JPEGs from Silkypix - I am exporting TIFFs, so there is no JPEG compression going on

The differences you are mentioning aren't likely to be JPEG compression related, but the underlying processing of the data before it gets written out.

However you look at the images, they still have to be "developed" from RAW images to "display" images. Curves, levels and a colour profile at least have to be applied - who knows what other processing is auto applied to the images (for example what do you have the settings for the i* settings in the camera - they could be being applied automagically - Canon DPP does this for example from data in the EXIF information).

 

[bl0at3r]

Took my D5100 to the Olympic mountain biking yesterday - whilst there I spent a lot of time mentally comparing what I was shooting, what settings I was using, what focal length etc. with a dslr vs m43 kit.

Firstly it was great to be out and about actually taking photos instead of being glued to the internet in a never ending circle of research and price comparison!

Next, the realisation that there will never be a camera that does everything I want and there are clearly compromises in any system.

Finally, the best camera is the one you have with you, and despite the fact I am extremely fussy with my kit, I am not a pro and don't have any desire to be. I'd rather have a camera I enjoy using and produces pictures I'm happy with - nobody else (if others like them too then great)

So, for now I've ordered a GX1 and I will then probably sell my Nikon stuff and buy an OM-D too

 

[Galaxy66]

Took my D5100 to the Olympic mountain biking yesterday - whilst there I spent a lot of time mentally comparing what I was shooting, what settings I was using, what focal length etc. with a dslr vs m43 kit.

Firstly it was great to be out and about actually taking photos instead of being glued to the internet in a never ending circle of research and price comparison!

Next, the realisation that there will never be a camera that does everything I want and there are clearly compromises in any system.

Finally, the best camera is the one you have with you, and despite the fact I am extremely fussy with my kit, I am not a pro and don't have any desire to be. I'd rather have a camera I enjoy using and produces pictures I'm happy with - nobody else (if others like them too then great)

So, for now I've ordered a GX1 and I will then probably sell my Nikon stuff and buy an OM-D too

Alan, it is good to see you have finally made a positive decision based on positive facts

 

[Beagletorque]

Took my D5100 to the Olympic mountain biking yesterday - whilst there I spent a lot of time mentally comparing what I was shooting, what settings I was using, what focal length etc. with a dslr vs m43 kit.

Firstly it was great to be out and about actually taking photos instead of being glued to the internet in a never ending circle of research and price comparison!

Next, the realisation that there will never be a camera that does everything I want and there are clearly compromises in any system.

Finally, the best camera is the one you have with you, and despite the fact I am extremely fussy with my kit, I am not a pro and don't have any desire to be. I'd rather have a camera I enjoy using and produces pictures I'm happy with - nobody else (if others like them too then great)

So, for now I've ordered a GX1 and I will then probably sell my Nikon stuff and buy an OM-D too

For posting images on the web any camera or phone will do the trick! Not a big fan of the funny processing though spoils what might be a decent shot or 2, difficult to tell.

 

[bl0at3r]

For posting images on the web any camera or phone will do the trick! Not a big fan of the funny processing though spoils what might be a decent shot or 2, difficult to tell.

 

[Glenn Surtees]

OM-D with Olympus OM Zuiko 100mm f2.8 at 2.8.

 

[bl0at3r]

OM-D with Olympus OM Zuiko 100mm f2.8 at 2.8.

psst - think you're in the wrong thread Glenn

 

[alan_g]

you out and about at the festival glenn?

 

[Glenn Surtees]

psst - think you're in the wrong thread Glenn

Sort of......:bang: I was trying to show what kind of results can be had with an adapted lens

 

[Glenn Surtees]

you out and about at the festival glenn?

Yip, just a couple of hours this afternoon

 

[alan_g]

great time to be in the burgh if you can stand the hussle and bustle

 

[rugeyes]

I asked the same question here: http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=411204

I ended up with a Pentax K mount for £8 delivered from ebay but still have no lenses and an OM mount and 28/2.8 and 50/1.8 OM lenses off here for £44 delivered. That foray into manual focus primes has now cost me £400 for a panny 25mm f/1.4 and thinking about another £200+ for the 45mm Olympus...

Thanks

 

[Spy]

Hi all,

I am interested to hear how people rate the GX1 compared to other CSC cameras such as the G3, GH2 or even the Olympus OM-D.

I know it is highly rated but whar its pros and cons against its similar competitors ?

I am interested in both photo and video performance

 

[PrinceCorum]

GX1 is excellent - great build quality, nice ergonomics.

Processing seems a bit better than in the G3 - better color (more neutral) for JPEG and raw and slightly better noise performance. Noise performance is also a bit better than the GH2 but worse than the OM-D.

The add-on EVF is superb but in Europe it is a bit pricey.

LCD is not as good as the Olypus E-P3 (which maybe should be on your list?).

Focus is very fast - possibly better than GH2, and at least as good as OM-D if not a bit better in low light.

Video performance is good, but there are no manual controls and it is not as good as the GH2, which offers the best video of any m 4/3 cam.

I actually prefer the GX1 to my new G5 - in terms of both ergonomics and IQ.

If money is no object the OM-D does sound like the best m 4/3 camera available for stills at present, though the number of problems encountered by users (IS problems, build problems, problems with Panasonic lenses, cameras "crashing" and needing a re-boot, etc) have put me off getting one (as well as the price).

So the GX1 is very good but so is the OM-D and E-P3. I suggest you try to find the cameras in a store and pick them up and play with them. One issue I have with the GX1, maybe because I have big hands and fat fingers, is that I keep accidentally pressing in the rear control wheel, which changes its function. I did not have this issue with my G3 or GH1.

Hi all,

I am interested to hear how people rate the GX1 compared to other CSC cameras such as the G3, GH2 or even the Olympus OM-D.

I know it is highly rated but whar its pros and cons against its similar competitors ?

I am interested in both photo and video performance

 

[Spy]

GX1 is excellent - great build quality, nice ergonomics.

Processing seems a bit better than in the G3 - better color (more neutral) for JPEG and raw and slightly better noise performance. Noise performance is also a bit better than the GH2 but worse than the OM-D.

The add-on EVF is superb but in Europe it is a bit pricey.

LCD is not as good as the Olypus E-P3 (which maybe should be on your list?).

Focus is very fast - possibly better than GH2, and at least as good as OM-D if not a bit better in low light.

Video performance is good, but there are no manual controls and it is not as good as the GH2, which offers the best video of any m 4/3 cam.

I actually prefer the GX1 to my new G5 - in terms of both ergonomics and IQ.

If money is no object the OM-D does sound like the best m 4/3 camera available for stills at present, though the number of problems encountered by users (IS problems, build problems, problems with Panasonic lenses, cameras "crashing" and needing a re-boot, etc) have put me off getting one (as well as the price).

So the GX1 is very good but so is the OM-D and E-P3. I suggest you try to find the cameras in a store and pick them up and play with them. One issue I have with the GX1, maybe because I have big hands and fat fingers, is that I keep accidentally pressing in the rear control wheel, which changes its function. I did not have this issue with my G3 or GH1.

Thanks for your excellent comparison.

Whilst I decide on whether I should move away from my Canon DSLR kit, I am trying out the m43 system.

I currently have a couple of panasonic lenses and a GF2 body. The GF2 is nice and has impressed in many areas but I am not sure about its 'portrait' performance. I have my eye on the OM-d but I will only buy that once I am certain I will be selling my Canon kit. In the meantime, I am contemplating potentially trying out a better, reasonably priced, body like the GX1 to compare, hence my question

 

[arad85]

GX1 is excellent - great build quality, nice ergonomics.

Processing seems a bit better than in the G3 - better color (more neutral) for JPEG and raw and slightly better noise performance.

I shoot in RAW and I haven't noticed any difference between GX1 and G3 performance developing through Lightroom 4.

Looking at a G5 now and from a handling point of view it appears streets ahead of both the GX1 and G3. They have moved the Q menu button to the right place, added the function lever and added the use of the LCD as a touchpad when you are using the EVF. All this means you can control the camera without moving the camera away from your eye or breakinbg your thumb as you try to select a function from the dial.

 

[CJS]

Looking at a G5 now and from a handling point of view it appears streets ahead of both the GX1 and G3. They have moved the Q menu button to the right place, added the function lever and added the use of the LCD as a touchpad when you are using the EVF. All this means you can control the camera without moving the camera away from your eye or breakinbg your thumb as you try to select a function from the dial.

Amazing . . . penny dropped? They got the phisical handling right first time round with the G1 . . . then they started to fiddle with the new Mk's, 'if it aint brock dont fix it, change for the sake of it'? . . . now they are back with a 'new model' gon full circle from what I can see. The electronic side seems like it may have benefited . . . but at what price?? . . . Oh yes, 'we can charge more, its a better camera now, they will never notice' . . . Find a G1 bargin in the used postings, personal opinion, say it as I see it, gumpy head on today ???:shrug:
CJS

 

[arad85]

Amazing . . . penny dropped? They got the phisical handling right first time round with the G1 . . .

I've not used a G1, but by the looks of the G5, they have improved it - significantly IMHO. The wheel is a rear wheel, the front control is a left/right switch. By putting the Q menu button where they have and having two controls allows you to change settings with one hand, without moving your eye away from the EVF.

Adding the touchpad functionality (i.e. you look through the viewfinder and can use the LCD pressure to control the camera) seems brilliant. Although I haven't tried it, it should be fairly easy to completely control the focus point positioning whilst looking through the EVF.

Those two features alone have sold it to me....

 

[woof woof]

Find a G1 bargin in the used postings, personal opinion, say it as I see it, gumpy head on today ???:shrug:
CJS

I like the handling of my G1 but there are a couple of issue that need addressing...

Dynamic range... it's limited. The in view histogram helps enormously as does careful post capture processing but there's simply no getting away from the fact that DR is limited and the competition offers much better performance in this regard.

Higher ISO performance... You can get perfectly good images at ISO 1600 and also at 3200 but you have to take care when shooting and process the shots carefully. In fact, so much care needs to be taken at 3200 that personally I don't bother. Again, there's no getting away from the fact that the competition have brought out cameras that are much better at higher ISO's.

And a problem for me... The G1 is next to useless for night time photography. The EVF backlight acts like a torch and destroys human night vision. Personally I need a different and better technology than Panny EVF. It ain't gonna happen.

 

[CJS]

At the price it was and the handling then that sold it to many, the G1 was the bees knees, it still takes some beating for my requirements, a lot of negatives apeared over the handling of later models . . . ?

. . . there is always better 'but at what cost'? For me, I am happy how the G1 presents to me, I like the 'front wheel', neaver take pics at night, althought I have used it for some decent sunsets, one tonight, had not got it with me:bang:

I've been less than happy with 'photography', recently . . . its fadding in interest for me . . . not 'fadding away' just fadding:shrug: I'm better of keeping myself to myself. . .

CJS

 

[woof woof]

I've been less than happy with 'photography', recently . . . its fadding in interest for me . . . not 'fadding away' just fadding:shrug: I'm better of keeping myself to myself. . . CJS

Personally I think you're a valued member of our little club here and I hope that you will both keep shooting and keep sharing your shots and views here.

Here's a few of mine, I may have posted them (or some of them) before but the reason for posting them today is that I was looking at them yesterday and thinking how they compare to shots from my 5D. IMVHO these shots have nothing to be ashamed of and could have been taken with something much more expensive. Mixed in with 5D shots anyone would have to pixel peep very closely if they were going to detect that they weren't 5D shots.

At 100% on my screen the detail is very good in each, and all taken with a camera and lens combination that cost under £150.

 

[CJS]

Alan . . . if I'm honest, nothing much is floating my boat at the moment . . . life in general is doing its best to get me down, got my 'grumpy head on' . . . but I will not give in, thanks for the reply and the pictures, this alone makes me feel a lot better. I'll pop out the other end at some time soon?

I like your set, one often asks the question, do we need the supper-dupper quality from a realy expensive camea, in any case its usualy the lens?? . . . 99% I doubt it:shrug: In my case probably 100% of the time. Another question, does one have the experiance to apreciate or make meanigfull use of such picture quality against the high cost and all the other impracticalities? My important factors are handling, weight, view finder, the animated rear screen and a picture that I can look at and enjoy on the computer . . . the G1 does it for me.

CJS

 

[Weldingblues]

I love the beach shots UK?

 

[Weldingblues]

Anybody using this lens - Panasonic Lumix G Vario PZ 45-175mm f/4-5.6 ASPH Power OIS Zoom Lens

Tried it at SRS,and it seemed very good.