"Panasonic G series" Owners Thread

woof woof said:
I think this maybe something to watch over coming weeks and months to see if anything becomes clear.
Click to expand...

The reasons given by Panasonic are to be blunt crap, Nikon/Canon can repair their lenses, Panasonic dont want to put a repair back up in place, they would rather sell you another lens.
 
mikew said:
The reasons given by Panasonic are to be blunt crap, Nikon/Canon can repair their lenses, Panasonic dont want to put a repair back up in place, they would rather sell you another lens.
Click to expand...

There will no doubt be some legal requirements. The products I was involved with weren't cameras or lenses but there had to be support for 10 years after the stuff stopped being manufactured. I'd be amazed if there wasn't a similar requirement in place for camera kit costing several hundred £ or more, the only question I have is how long it needs to be supported.
 
woof woof said:
I use my MFT kit taking into consideration the crop factor for the aperture and so usually use apertures between wide open and f5.6 because with FF I'd probably mostly be between f2.8 and f10. I'd describe all of my MFT lenses as good wide open and perfectly useable but of course if you pixel peep a picture at 100% you can often find something to complain about. In isolation I'm perfectly happy with my GX80 and Oly 17mm f1.8 but if I make a direct comparison to an identical picture taken with my Sony A7 and Sony 35mm 2.8 the Sony will be sharper at 100% but for looking at a whole picture normally or even closely I think it'd only be an obsessive pixel peeper who'd complain about the Oly 17mm's sharpness :D

Apart from on internet forums I've never ever had anyone say "Woof Woof, that picture isn't sharp." Actually even when it's happened on internet forums I've ignored it as IMO anyone who criticises a picture based on a 1,000 pixel wide shot saved as quality 7 or 8 (rather than 12) and posted on line probably needs something else to worry about :D
Click to expand...


I never used the 17mm, I'm just going by reviews, I guess they have to point these things out. I use my 25 1.7 wide open all the time, got no issues with it, it's sharper at F4, but like you say, only a pixel peeper is really going to notice.
 
woof woof said:
I use my MFT kit taking into consideration the crop factor for the aperture and so usually use apertures between wide open and f5.6 because with FF I'd probably mostly be between f2.8 and f10. I'd describe all of my MFT lenses as good wide open and perfectly useable but of course if you pixel peep a picture at 100% you can often find something to complain about. In isolation I'm perfectly happy with my GX80 and Oly 17mm f1.8 but if I make a direct comparison to an identical picture taken with my Sony A7 and Sony 35mm 2.8 the Sony will be sharper at 100% but for looking at a whole picture normally or even closely I think it'd only be an obsessive pixel peeper who'd complain about the Oly 17mm's sharpness :D

Apart from on internet forums I've never ever had anyone say "Woof Woof, that picture isn't sharp." Actually even when it's happened on internet forums I've ignored it as IMO anyone who criticises a picture based on a 1,000 pixel wide shot saved as quality 7 or 8 (rather than 12) and posted on line probably needs something else to worry about :D
Click to expand...

Heck, I've got zero issues* with the much derided Oly 17mm f2.8. These taken on the 12MP Oly e-p2 +17mm f2.8 the other day, its my lunch break walk about combo

*Oh ok, the AF is slightly slower than my more recent Panny lenses


P5150170.jpg P5160179.jpg P5150165.jpg P5160186-3.jpg
 
Last edited:
Ste_S said:
Heck, I've got zero issues* with the much derided Oly 17mm f2.8. These taken on the 12MP Oly e-p2 +17mm f2.8 the other day, its my lunch break walk about combo

*Oh ok, the AF is slightly slower than my more recent Panny lenses
Click to expand...

I've never used the 17mm f2.8, I have the later 17mm f1.8, but if the f2.8 is also thought of as not being amongst the best I'm glad that it's ignoring the negative internet chatter and getting on with helping you to take nice pictures :D
 
Where do you guys read all this lens hate? I've never seen these lenses slated, only that the 17 1.8 isn't the sharpest wide open. I don't think I have ever actually seen a review on the 2.8 version. If anything, the Panasonic 25mm 1.7 tends to stir up the most marmite discussions, some say it's absoloute crap, others hail it as the best value prime ever .... me, I know it's pretty decent, but if it was twice the money I wouldn't even own it. You make the best of what you have, and your budget, if you're a good shooter then it doesn't matter a damn what glass you use, you'll turn something good out.
 
Cagey75 said:
Where do you guys read all this lens hate? I've never seen these lenses slated, only that the 17 1.8 isn't the sharpest wide open. I don't think I have ever actually seen a review on the 2.8 version. If anything, the Panasonic 25mm 1.7 tends to stir up the most marmite discussions, some say it's absoloute crap, others hail it as the best value prime ever .... me, I know it's pretty decent, but if it was twice the money I wouldn't even own it. You make the best of what you have, and your budget, if you're a good shooter then it doesn't matter a damn what glass you use, you'll turn something good out.
Click to expand...

Just the usual review sites. I don't think I've seen anyone actually slate the 17mm f1.8 but from memory I'm sure I've read a few lukewarm reviews with less than the best sharpness being one criticism.
 
woof woof said:
Just the usual review sites. I don't think I've seen anyone actually slate the 17mm f1.8 but from memory I'm sure I've read a few lukewarm reviews with less than the best sharpness being one criticism.
Click to expand...

It's weird how some reviewers or even just forumites find issues where others don't, or what one reviewer will get hung up on and others let slide because of value for money etc. I've only seen that lens get 'cons' I guess, here and there, but mostly solid reviews. Similar situation with the Fuji 18mm F2, also the 23mm F2, with many suggesting they were soft until stopped down, others saying they're crazy

In the case of the Pany 25 I've noticed it missing from 'best value' M43 lens lists, or 'best 25mm for MFT' - and found it very odd. I do know that some slated it for not being very sharp wide open, but they missed the trick, the 25 needs to be shot in manual mode with constant preview on, so the aperture blades stay put between shots. In any auto modes the lens opens wide between shots and only closes down when shutter is pressed, which leads to focus shift issues. Of course the lens shouldn't have this issue, many fly-by-wire lenses function this way but don't have focus shift problems. But it is a little gem once you know this, sharp at all apertures from my experience.
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
That's convincing enough for me :)
Click to expand...

the black fox said:
And me ,will probably buy later in the week ,to much other personal stuff happening over the next few days
Click to expand...

I feel I should put my money where my mouth is.

Sigma 60mm f2.8

Murphy by Simon Harrison, on Flickr

Ullswater Autumn by Simon Harrison, on Flickr

Sigma 19mm f2.8

Saltburn Sunrise by Simon Harrison, on Flickr

West_Burton_Falls_021113_P1050365 by Simon Harrison, on Flickr

Both great lenses.

Simon.
 
Very impressive simon cheers ,I will order one over the weekend ,to ensure that someone’s in to receive it ,we have a double wedding to attend sat daughter and grandaughter so it’s chaos here
 
changed my mind over the sigma lens for now ,after today I have realised that even with very good i.s a monopod would be more helpful so just ordered a sirui c/f monopod .heres a insect from today hand held
insect ? by jeff and jan cohen, on Flickr
 
srhmoto said:
Superb Jeff. You got a link to the monopod you’re getting?
Click to expand...
nope but its a sirui P224SR just google it . what I realised today was that even with 5 axis i.s at full reach with the 2x crop factor your basically trying to focus a 800mm lens and given my age I think every little bit helps
 
the black fox said:
nope but its a sirui P224SR just google it . what I realised today was that even with 5 axis i.s at full reach with the 2x crop factor your basically trying to focus a 800mm lens and given my age I think every little bit helps
Click to expand...

Look after your G80 one of the rumour sites is saying its the end of the line for that range, if its true i can understand why, its ability i bet is close to the G9.
 
I've seen a fair amount of comparison vids between the G80 and G9, the differences are all in the hardware really. There's nothing between them image quality wise, or at least nothing noticeable outside of extreme pixel peeping. What you do get for the money is a better EVF, better overall build quality, better grip, much better IBIS [Pany claim the G9 to have 6.5 stops] and better AF. It does better 4K video also, if you're into that.
 
Cagey75 said:
I've seen a fair amount of comparison vids between the G80 and G9, the differences are all in the hardware really. There's nothing between them image quality wise, or at least nothing noticeable outside of extreme pixel peeping. What you do get for the money is a better EVF, better overall build quality, better grip, much better IBIS [Pany claim the G9 to have 6.5 stops] and better AF. It does better 4K video also, if you're into that.
Click to expand...

I doubt that there's much if any real world difference in raw output between the G9 and G80, but the G9's JPEG output is supposed to be much improved over earlier cameras. As I tend to shoot raw pretty much 100% of the time, this is pretty much a moot point for me.

Simon.
 
At one point I was considering a Olympus om.d mk1 as a alternative ,but I think I,m getting on top of the G80 at last
 
Last edited:
the black fox said:
At one point I was considering a Olympus om.d mk1 as a alternative ,but I think I,m getting on top of the G80 at last
Click to expand...

If the Oly boys read this i will get shot, i cant get the keeper rate with BIF on the EM1MK11 that i was getting with the G80, ok some will say user error.
I changed to the Oly because i felt i had taken the G80 as far as i could with action captures, maybe i had but i am starting to regret the change,tried just about every combination of settings and have come to the conclusion its a combination of lens and PDAF focusing.
The G80 used CDAF with DFD enhancement for S-AF and C-AF the lock on for focus was very quick and it stayed with the subject well.
The Olympus uses CDAF for S-AF and its lock on is just as quick maybe quicker than the G80 but we are talking single shot here and pumping the shutter button to get a burst of BIF results, if i go onto C-AF the Olympus uses PDAF the lock on time is very hit and miss, maintaing lock can be very frustrating, ime using the 100-400 still and begining to think its just too slow for the phase detect focusing in the Olympus.
At the moment ime seeing it as a quick way to lose money and what ime saying is i dont believe the MK1 Olympus would be anywhere near as good as the G80.
 
Fair comment mike coming from someone with user experience .possibly saved me a few bob that I can I’ll afford to spend .starting to get some decent stuff with mine as long as I think about the settings before shooting .
 
Nothing special about this image (been playing golf today) - I am posting it because it's the G9 with the PL100-400, wide open at f6.3 @ 400mm (800mm ff equiv), ISO 6400. So maximum aperture at maximum reach. I don't think it's too bad.

Mrs Blackbird by Malcolm Fisher, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
Just done a separate personal write up on my thoughts and settings with the G80 and 100-400 so far ,it might help others in a turmoil with this rather complicated set up or even as one message I have had with G9 settings
 
I've been experimenting with the Panasonic 12-60 as a travel lens for when I want a one lens solution. It's not as sharp as the 12-35, to be expected for the price, but the focal length range is nice and the close focus ability makes it quite versatile, it's certainly capable of producing nice images with a little sharpening in post.

P1260088 copy (Large).jpg P1260110 copy (Large).jpg P1260184 copy (Large).jpg
 
CSB said:
I've been experimenting with the Panasonic 12-60 as a travel lens for when I want a one lens solution. It's not as sharp as the 12-35, to be expected for the price, but the focal length range is nice and the close focus ability makes it quite versatile, it's certainly capable of producing nice images with a little sharpening in post.
Click to expand...

I like do it all lenses. I have the Panny 12-35mm f2.8 which I think is excellent but I also have the 14-42mm Mega OIS which although not as good and only f3.5-5.6 it is sharp enough from wide open and the size of a prime lens and I do find it a very nice charming little lens for when I want the 14-42mm range in a very small lens :D
 
I'm new to this thread and returning to M4/3rds with an old olympus em1 but curious about the Panasonic 100-400. Has anyone got any knowledge about how it compares to the only 40 - 150 and does it work well on the em1? I currently use a sigma 150-600 on a nikon D850 for wildlife and the Panasonic sounds like a pretty good alternative in a smaller size..
I'll try to work my way through the thread but any wisdom would be much appreciated
 
stevewestern said:
I'm new to this thread and returning to M4/3rds with an old olympus em1 but curious about the Panasonic 100-400. Has anyone got any knowledge about how it compares to the only 40 - 150 and does it work well on the em1? I currently use a sigma 150-600 on a nikon D850 for wildlife and the Panasonic sounds like a pretty good alternative in a smaller size..
I'll try to work my way through the thread but any wisdom would be much appreciated
Click to expand...


It'll give you more reach than your current 150-600, the much cheaper Panasonic 100-300 mkII would be more a direct comparison. The 100-400 is a different animal, by all accounts it's faster [AF] sharper and you have that extra reach of course. It also has better magnification, 1:4 , which is excellent for a telephoto, you can do some pretty decent macro-esque work with it. The black fox has one, he has also crossed over the M43 recently and he has a separate thread about this lens too. Just look through the last few pages here and you'll see some good examples.
 
As Keith has said I have just moved from a canon 1d and sigma 150-600 sport ,basically I changed due to age issues and the weight was getting to me . So far it’s a steep learning curve but the 100-400 is a dream once you get it right ,just been out so watch my posts later on I think I have some good ones
 
Cagey75 said:
It'll give you more reach than your current 150-600, the much cheaper Panasonic 100-300 mkII would be more a direct comparison. The 100-400 is a different animal, by all accounts it's faster [AF] sharper and you have that extra reach of course. It also has better magnification, 1:4 , which is excellent for a telephoto, you can do some pretty decent macro-esque work with it. The black fox has one, he has also crossed over the M43 recently and he has a separate thread about this lens too. Just look through the last few pages here and you'll see some good examples.
Click to expand...
I find myself using the 150-600 at 600 almost all of the time, and still needing to crop a fair bit - thankfully my Nikon D850 allows that. The whole idea of an EM1 is to have a lighter option, which the 100-400 is, with the added extra reach. Yes, FF to M4/3rds is a big difference, but a smaller camera may get out more, and at this stage I am not thinking of replacing the D850 !
I'll take a look at The Black Fox's posts and thread - Thanks !

the black fox said:
As Keith has said I have just moved from a canon 1d and sigma 150-600 sport ,basically I changed due to age issues and the weight was getting to me . So far it’s a steep learning curve but the 100-400 is a dream once you get it right ,just been out so watch my posts later on I think I have some good ones
Click to expand...
I will, I will ! Thanks too !
 
stevewestern said:
I find myself using the 150-600 at 600 almost all of the time, and still needing to crop a fair bit - thankfully my Nikon D850 allows that. The whole idea of an EM1 is to have a lighter option, which the 100-400 is, with the added extra reach. Yes, FF to M4/3rds is a big difference, but a smaller camera may get out more, and at this stage I am not thinking of replacing the D850 !
I'll take a look at The Black Fox's posts and thread - Thanks !


I will, I will ! Thanks too !
Click to expand...


It is very liberating to have that kind of range in a smaller, tidier package for sure. I shot FF Nikon myself for many years, and at one point had the 300mm F4 + 1.4x TC on the D800E, and I was never really satisfied by it's reach. The D800 aloowed hefty crops of course, but you are losing a lot of pixels that way. The 100-300 on my G80 is impressive for how light and small the combination is. I would love the 100-400, but it's well out of my current budget. If you have the funds, I would say just go for it, i doubt you'd be disappointed.
 
Last edited:
one important thing has caught my eye after processing yesterdays pics ,I am a long term user of Lightroom CC and have been a fan of there pre-sets for the sliders since they brought them in ,works fine with the canon gear I have been using previously BUT I changed back last night to adjusting manually and BIG difference to the finished shots ,it appears that Lightroom dont have the correct RAW parameters for Panasonic cameras /lenses built in ,so in future I will be doing it my way . might not effect everyone but it might help someone struggling .heres one I did last night ,changes are subtle but definetly there .

profiles ? by jeff and jan cohen, on Flickr
 
Thom Hogan has done a piece on if MFT is still a viable choice...

http://www.sansmirror.com/newsviews/is-m43-still-a-viable-choic.html

For me it is and very much so with the latest post shutter shock cameras and the later 16mp and 20mp sensors because the image quality although behind what's available from FF is easily better than anything I got from 35mm film, better than a modern 1" sensor camera and more surprisingly better than I got from my FF Canon 5D which was SOTA just a few years ago and also because I like compact kit.

My GX80 and a 17mm f1.8 may not be significantly smaller than my FF Sony A7 and 35mm f2.8 but a GX80 and a 45mm f1.8 or a zoom is much more compact than an A7 and 85mm f1.8 or zoom and it's the good if not FF beating at pixel peeping level image quality coupled to the compact form that makes MFT attractive to me.

Thom suggests a Fuji X-A5, Canon M or Sony A6xxx rather than MFT but to me all of these choices have major drawbacks. That Fuji doesn't have an EVF and is AFAIK X Trans and that all puts me off and of course the lenses are bigger, the lens line up for the Canon M is AFAIK limited and the Sony A6xxx has gaps in its lens line up and some of the lenses are again being APS-C for me prohibitably large for a small form system.

So for me there is definitely a place for MFT and I can't see that changing anytime too soon unless some new disruptive technology comes along to make 1" cameras and/or phones a quantum leap better or which would allow the larger APS-C and FF lenses to be a lot more compact.
 
the black fox said:
one important thing has caught my eye after processing yesterdays pics ,I am a long term user of Lightroom CC and have been a fan of there pre-sets for the sliders since they brought them in ,works fine with the canon gear I have been using previously BUT I changed back last night to adjusting manually and BIG difference to the finished shots ,it appears that Lightroom dont have the correct RAW parameters for Panasonic cameras /lenses built in ,so in future I will be doing it my way . might not effect everyone but it might help someone struggling .heres one I did last night ,changes are subtle but definetly there.
Click to expand...

I always shoot raw and although I then apply a preset I do adjust each picture for best effect and/or taste in CS5.

One thing I have noticed is that my pictures posted here can look quite different from how they look on my pc but I don't optimise for forum posting in any way, I just downsize and post.
 
woof woof said:
I always shoot raw and although I then apply a preset I do adjust each picture for best effect and/or taste in CS5.

One thing I have noticed is that my pictures posted here can look quite different from how they look on my pc but I don't optimise for forum posting in any way, I just downsize and post.
Click to expand...
I always host and post my pics via Flickr Alan and usually there a bit larger and better here ,the best forum I have found for displaying images clearly is the American based photography on the net .but that’s not what my post was about .its a alert to anyone that uses the latest lightroom C.C with its host of pre.set updates
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top