"Panasonic G series" Owners Thread

[tijuana taxi]

Yep, you're right. But it's so slow to focus. I've thought about taking it out on the street but worried I might lose the cute little squarish hood. Any excuse to grab a zoom.

Strangely enough I have a spare hood for that lens, no lens though, model printed on it is H-ES045.
It also fits the 25 1.4 which I owned at one time and is a nice replacement for the larger hood the 25 comes with.

 

[d00d]

H-ES045

Yeah that's the one. Touch it in the wrong place and it becomes unlocked then, if you're not careful, it'll drop off.

 

[woof woof]

I've seen tests in the past that showed that cheap filters did cause loss of contrast, etc. and increased the likelihood of flare. It's quite possible that current cheap filters are much better than they used to be but, until I see tests that prove it, I'll stick with top-quality filters. If I've paid £1000 for a lens then £100 for the filter seems a reasonable investment.

One difficulty would be providing evidence as the posting process could make things difficult to see.

Anyway. In the past the only issue I was aware of was if there are lights in the frame and I'd guess the instances of needing a filter to protect the front of a lens cashing with there being light sources in the frame are going to be few and if these two things do coincide a decision one way or the other will have to be made. Perhaps protecting the lens from contamination will win as any reflections or loss of contrast from light sources wont be quite as important as protection the front of the lens.

 

[Crotal Bell]

One difficulty would be providing evidence as the posting process could make things difficult to see.

Anyway. In the past the only issue I was aware of was if there are lights in the frame and I'd guess the instances of needing a filter to protect the front of a lens cashing with there being light sources in the frame are going to be few and if these two things do coincide a decision one way or the other will have to be made. Perhaps protecting the lens from contamination will win as any reflections or loss of contrast from light sources wont be quite as important as protection the front of the lens.

Sensor burn out, that was it. Add a UV filter to avoid the risk of sensor "burn out"
Being a newbie I just went out and got one for the FZ82

 

[Snapsh0t]

Sensor burn out, that was it. Add a UV filter to avoid the risk of sensor "burn out"
Being a newbie I just went out and got one for the FZ82

I've heard some twaddle but that's pretty near the top of the pile.

 

[woof woof]

Sensor burn out, that was it. Add a UV filter to avoid the risk of sensor "burn out"
Being a newbie I just went out and got one for the FZ82

I may be wrong but I think that's probably written by someone being very over cautious.

I don't think it's anything you should be worried about.

 

[woof woof]

I was just going for a picture down the path towards the war memorial when his little chap made an appearance and as he was posing it seemed rude not to take his picture so I moved to the right and took the snap.

GM5 and 20mm f1.7.

 

[Crotal Bell]

I was just going for a picture down the path towards the war memorial when his little chap made an appearance and as he was posing it seemed rude not to take his picture so I moved to the right and took the snap.

GM5 and 20mm f1.7.

I love that Alan. What were your focussing choices on this please?

 

[woof woof]

I'd already focussed on the memorial when the squirrel appeared and I didn't have time to refocus, I just swivelled a bit and pressed the shutter. The lens is the 20mm f1.7 and the aperture was f4 so that would give pretty much depth from not too far in front of me to infinity.

 

[Crotal Bell]

I'd already focussed on the memorial when the squirrel appeared and I didn't have time to refocus, I just swivelled a bit and pressed the shutter. The lens is the 20mm f1.7 and the aperture was f4 so that would give pretty much depth from not too far in front of me to infinity.

This is what I still need to work out. I assume that F4 is for portrait and bokeh and when I want DOF I always go up to say F8.

 

[woof woof]

This is what I still need to work out. I assume that F4 is for portrait and bokeh and when I want DOF I always go up to say F8.

I grew up with 35mm film so it helps me to convert everything to FF speak. Maybe I'm too old to learn new things or maybe as Mrs WW says my brain is too full of "useless things." Anyway. MFT is a x2 crop system so f4 on MFT is like f8 on FF for DoF but of course not for exposure. So, I know that on 35mm or FF f8 with a 40mm lens will get me pretty much front to back acceptable sharpness when focussed at a distance so f4 with a 20mm on MFT should do the same and get me pretty good front to back sharpness from not too far in front of the camera to infinity.

I personally would view f8 on MFT as getting a bit extreme as I'd equate that to f16 on 35mm FF. I may use f8 now and again on MFT, but mostly I shoot wide open to f5/f5.6. I think I'd really only go to f8 if I had something close to the camera and wanted it sharp but also deep depth to the shot too.

 

[Crotal Bell]

I grew up with 35mm film so it helps me to convert everything to FF speak. Maybe I'm too old to learn new things or maybe as Mrs WW says my brain is too full of "useless things." Anyway. MFT is a x2 crop system so f4 on MFT is like f8 on FF for DoF but of course not for exposure. So, I know that on 35mm or FF f8 with a 40mm lens will get me pretty much front to back acceptable sharpness when focussed at a distance so f4 with a 20mm on MFT should do the same and get me pretty good front to back sharpness from not too far in front of the camera to infinity.

I personally would view f8 on MFT as getting a bit extreme as I'd equate that to f16 on 35mm FF. I may use f8 now and again on MFT, but mostly I shoot wide open to f5/f5.6. I think I'd really only go to f8 if I had something close to the camera and wanted it sharp but also deep depth to the shot too.

I keep forgetting that everything needs to be converted for MFT

 

[woof woof]

I keep forgetting that everything needs to be converted for MFT

There's no need to convert things unless like me you're stuck in the 1980's (or even before) shooting film or FF. That's why I convert everything. Because I'm stuck in the past

If you want shallow dof with mft you need to be shooting at f1.x to f2.x and possibly reducing your camera to subject distance. If you want deeper dof you need to be at f4 and smaller. Remember also that DoF remains the same at different focal lengths if your framing is the same because with the shorter focal lengths you'll be closer to the subject thus reducing the dof and with the longer lengths you'll be further away thus increasing the dof. The perspective will change though at each new camera to subject distance.

Ah. Here's a good example... Although it does look a bit soft here. On my screen the pier is sharp as are the pebbles at the bottom of the frame. The only thing not sharp is that first knob on the railing.

This was taken with a FF camera and a 50mm lens at f8 so that would be 25mm at f4 with MFT. Here I leaned forward and leaned on the railing and focused at infinity and everything except that knob on first post on the railing is acceptably sharp. The reason the first knob isn't sharp is because it's too close to the camera to be in the dof. If it wasn't there everything would be acceptably sharp. This is one reason why I often take scenic shots stood up... because anything in the frame is then so far away that it's in the dof even at moderate apertures, like f8 on FF and f4 on MFT.

Sorry about posting a FF picture in this thread but it's just to illustrate the point about dof and aperture and could easily have been taken with a MFT set up at f4.

Here's a similar MFT 20mm at f4 picture but without the out of dof post. Here everything is acceptably sharp front to back because there's nothing close to the camera.

If I wanted something close to the camera to be in the dof and everything else to be acceptably sharp I'd have to use a smaller aperture and focus closer.

An example. This is 24mm on FF at f11 and focused on the gash close to the bottom of the frame so that would be 12mm at f5.6 on MFT.

I hope that helps Keith.

 

[nandbytes]

hello folks, I recently picked G100+20mm/1.7
so I noticed that 20mm lens doesn't support AF-C which came as a surprise to me.
Is there someway to check what lenses support this and what lenses don't?
A list somewhere that I can look up?

 

[tijuana taxi]

Although this list is for the G80 it will give you an idea of lens capabilities
https://av.jpn.support.panasonic.com/support/global/cs/dsc/connect/g80.html

 

[d00d]

This is what I still need to work out. I assume that F4 is for portrait and bokeh and when I want DOF I always go up to say F8.

I keep forgetting that everything needs to be converted for MFT

Not necessarily.

There are many variables, namely, your distance from the subject, the distance from the subject to the background, your field of view.

You have to get to know your lenses, it's got to be better than me going into detail, but basically, you get the most OOF/blurred BGs when:

Camera is close to the subject, subject is far from the BG and/or you have a narrow FOV. Narrow FOV is achieved (with your zoom lens) by standing back and zooming in. Take it from there.

Here's a shot taken with my Pana 100-300 at 100mm f/4 at about the closest AF distance of 1.5 metres.

And I think I could show you examples of MFT at f/4 and at f/8 and you wouldn't notice the difference. A bit of cropping might be required.

 

[Crotal Bell]

Not necessarily.

There are many variables, namely, your distance from the subject, the distance from the subject to the background, your field of view.

You have to get to know your lenses, it's got to be better than me going into detail, but basically, you get the most OOF/blurred BGs when:

Camera is close to the subject, subject is far from the BG and/or you have a narrow FOV. Narrow FOV is achieved (with your zoom lens) by standing back and zooming in. Take it from there.

Here's a shot taken with my Pana 100-300 at 100mm f/4 at about the closest AF distance of 1.5 metres.

And I think I could show you examples of MFT at f/4 and at f/8 and you wouldn't notice the difference. A bit of cropping might be required.

Interesting, I think I see what you're saying. If a subject is out on it's own you can get close, if it's got things fairly close behind it, then use your zoom ?

 

[nandbytes]

Although this list is for the G80 it will give you an idea of lens capabilities
https://av.jpn.support.panasonic.com/support/global/cs/dsc/connect/g80.html

Great so there is only one Panasonic lens that doesn't support AF-C and I decided to buy just that one. What were the chances!

 

[Sangoma]

Great so there is only one Panasonic lens that doesn't support AF-C and I decided to buy just that one. What were the chances!

Probably a greater chance than many others, considering it is a nice lens to have and the price is usually very good

I have one, and to be honest, not being able to use AFC doesn't make any difference to what I can do with it.
It still works in AFS mode even if the camera has AFC selected, just that youo get the reminder to turn to AFS when you turn the camera on.

The other lenses I could use (14-42 14-45, 12-60, 14-140) all cover that length, so the times I do use it, probably I don't want AFC so don't notice the lack of it.

I agree disappointing if the use you bought it for needs AFC, sure you would get you money back if re-sold though, though maybe not quite enough for the 25mm.

 

[tijuana taxi]

Great so there is only one Panasonic lens that doesn't support AF-C and I decided to buy just that one. What were the chances!

Looking at that list, about 43;1, so you were a bit unlucky, presumably its down to the slow focus motor,
To be fair I don't suppose many people buy that lens for using AF-C with it.

 

[nandbytes]

Probably a greater chance than many others, considering it is a nice lens to have and the price is usually very good

I have one, and to be honest, not being able to use AFC doesn't make any difference to what I can do with it.
It still works in AFS mode even if the camera has AFC selected, just that youo get the reminder to turn to AFS when you turn the camera on.

The other lenses I could use (14-42 14-45, 12-60, 14-140) all cover that length, so the times I do use it, probably I don't want AFC so don't notice the lack of it.

I agree disappointing if the use you bought it for needs AFC, sure you would get you money back if re-sold though, though maybe not quite enough for the 25mm.

Looking at that list, about 43;1, so you were a bit unlucky, presumably its down to the slow focus motor,
To be fair I don't suppose many people buy that lens for using AF-C with it.

I didn't buy it just to use it in AF-C. But when I tried it and camera said no, I was really surprised. I thought may be camera was faulty and tried it on the other body to get same error.
Quick Google showed what it was.

I'll still keep it, I really like the focal length, size and optical performance of this lens.

Looking to buy the Olympus 60mm macro next.
And then last lens will the Panasonic 9mm/1.8.
Then I'm done with my m43 kit.
Already have the 12-32mm and the oly body cap lens.

 

[woof woof]

I've just received a Panasonic G100 and I'm quite impressed apart from one thing.

The camera only has one top of camera dial and also has a back wheel which can be used as follows.

In aperture or shutter priority it alters exposure compensation and in manual it alters either aperture or shutter depending on how you've set it and it can be toggled to set exposure compensation.

My problem is that when shooting I find that the back wheel is always getting jogged and dialling in changes. I've tried the menu option "dial set" but there's no option to turn the back wheel off and it always remains on. If I turn exposure compensation off the back wheel defaults to either aperture or shutter depending on what mode you're in so you end up with two dials changing the same setting and still have the danger of accidentally jogging the back wheel.

If I can't train myself to stop accidentally jogging it and I don't think I can as the slightest brush moves it I wont wont keep it. Sadly this accidental jogging of the back wheel is exactly what I thought would be a problem. Unless I'm missing some way of turning it off. Does anyone know if this is possible?

 

[Sangoma]

What about setting it to flash mode?

 

[woof woof]

View attachment 359661

What about setting it to flash mode?

Thanks but...

Under "Dial Operation Switch Setup" you get a lot of choices and none of them is "off." If I select any of the listed options the back wheel doesn't seem to take any notice and alters either the aperture or the shutter depending what you're in. It alters the aperture in aperture mode, the shutter speed in shutter mode and in manual mode it alters either shutter or aperture depending how I've set it up or by toggling it alters exposure compensation.

I don't know how people live with these back dials. I've tried several times now and I just can't shoot and use the back buttons without jogging this dial and changing a setting. The only way to shoot and not do so seems to be to have my thumb strictly at the top of the camera and to not attempt to press any of the back back buttons but even that doesn't work as when switching to portrait orientation my thumb catches the dial.

Awful, and I think it's going back.

 

[Sangoma]

I have often been tempted by the G100, at first glance it does all I want, and they go for a very attractive price.
The only thing that hat stopped me is I don't think I want to live with a max mechanical shutter speed of 1/500, it is far too slow for many things I do.

I may still give in to temptation one day when one goes for well under the normal price (as did both my G80 and G9 )

Would be very interested to hear your comments if you keep it a while

 

[Sangoma]

Thanks but...

Under "Dial Operation Switch Setup" you get a lot of choices and none of them is "off." If I select any of the listed options the back wheel doesn't seem to take any notice and alters either the aperture or the shutter depending what you're in. It alters the aperture in aperture mode, the shutter speed in shutter mode and in manual mode it alters either shutter or aperture depending how I've set it up or by toggling it alters exposure compensation.

I think I made a mistake, are you talking about the rotating part of the 4 way ?

 

[woof woof]

I think I made a mistake, are you talking about the rotating part of the 4 way ?

Yup.

That's the problem. There's a dial around the buttons and I just can't use the camera without moving it and changing settings and I can't find any option to turn it off.

I'm now 99.9% certain this pile of poop is going back.

PS.
It's not actually around the buttons, it's around the menu set dial, the buttons being under the rotating ring.

 

[Sangoma]

Yup.

That's the problem. There's a dial around the buttons and I just can't use the camera without moving it and changing settings and I can't find any option to turn it off.

I'm now 99.9% certain this pile of poop is going back.

PS.
It's not actually around the buttons, it's around the menu set dial, the buttons being under the rotating ring.

Yes, i was just trying to locate it

This was a problem Panasonic had many years ago, starting with the TZ1, the mode dial would often be moved by mistake, would think they would have taken it into account!

 

[woof woof]

Yes, i was just trying to locate it

This was a problem Panasonic had many years ago, starting with the TZ1, the mode dial would often be moved by mistake, would think they would have taken it into account!

Thanks for trying.

I think it'll go back. Such as shame as other than this it's a nice camera but spoilt by this IMO stupid design decision.

 

[Sangoma]

Yes, it is a pity.
The G9 has the same arrangement, and I'm sure at least one of the Canons I had had the same.

Just shows again that the camera must feel right for you, it doesn't follow that it is right because some one else finds it OK

 

[woof woof]

Yes, it is a pity.
The G9 has the same arrangement, and I'm sure at least one of the Canons I had had the same.

Just shows again that the camera must feel right for you, it doesn't follow that it is right because some one else finds it OK

My A7 has a back wheel but thankfully Sony let you turn it off... Problem solved.

I had Canon DSLR's and this was never a problem, but that was years ago and I can't remember what the wheel did apart from let you change options in the menu.

 

[d00d]

Parliament Sq. today ...

100-300 at 100mm

 

[Stephen L]

Yes, it is a pity.
The G9 has the same arrangement, and I'm sure at least one of the Canons I had had the same.

Just shows again that the camera must feel right for you, it doesn't follow that it is right because some one else finds it OK

If, on the G9, we’re talking about the ring round the D pads, then it’s never bothered me. I would have to move my thumb quite a distance to contact it. The G9 is possibly the most ergonomic camera I have used. Each to their own.

 

[woof woof]

If, on the G9, we’re talking about the ring round the D pads, then it’s never bothered me. I would have to move my thumb quite a distance to contact it. The G9 is possibly the most ergonomic camera I have used. Each to their own.

This is with the G100 which is quite a small camera. In landscape orientation my thumb lightly brushes the wheel but in portrait orientation there's more contact and when moving my thumb to press buttons contact with the wheel is very easy.

I've always thought that these back wheels are too easy to jog and relying on it for such a basic control such as aperture, shutter or exposure comp is IMO an ergonomic failure. Two or three near top of camera dials are the best for me but having said that the even smaller GM5 is better as aperture and shutter are adjusted with one dial which is clickable to toggle functions and allows exposure compensation in aperture and shutter modes. There's no exposure comp in manual with the GM5 though as this is only possible with later cameras.

I've calmed down a teeny bit now but the G100 may still go back. The problem is that apart from this basic problem the camera is quite good and has a nice evf. I've looked at the Oly range and couldn't find anything to match this camera as the Oly's I looked at all seem to have at least one problem or lack of a feature I want.

Oh, and my Sony A7 also has a back wheel but you can turn it off. Why Panasonic don't allow this wheel to be turned off I just don't know, stupidity I suppose as the problem could be fixed by disabling the back wheel (or just not fitting it) and allowing one control to toggle between functions.

I'll have another play and decide if I'm keeping it or sending it back tomorrow.

 

[Sangoma]

If, on the G9, we’re talking about the ring round the D pads, then it’s never bothered me. I would have to move my thumb quite a distance to contact it. The G9 is possibly the most ergonomic camera I have used. Each to their own.

I have to agree.
It is very much like a Pentax in that way, but better.
The big step up from the G80 for me is the front wheel behind the shutter release. When using a Pentax, I used to use the middle finger on the shutter (a "hint" I was given to help squeeze the shutter instead of pushing it, and for me it worked) and the pointing finger on the wheel, thumb on back wheel, you can adjust speed, aperture and release the shutter without moving any digit between buttons, which for me is quicker and smoother.

And if you include the menu in ergonomics, combined with button layout and customisation, I don't think I would find anything to beat it.

For me, it has put the zest back into photography in the same way as my first SLR did in 1973

 

[woof woof]

Well this is an odd one.

I decided to keep the G100 so I took it out to test it today and I'm getting massive distortion with both Olympus and Panasonic lenses with both RAW and JPEG. I've not seen anything like this before, it's as if the camera isn't applying in camera corrections. I've spoken to the shop and they asked me to email some examples which I've just done.

Obviously, I've used these lenses many times without an issue and I've just tried them again on my GX9 and there's no distortion.

Here's a couple of examples...

I've trawled through the menu just in case but I can't see anything relevant.

Anyone seen anything like this before?

 

[Sangoma]

Is the firmware up to date?

 

[woof woof]

Is the firmware up to date?

No idea.
Camera = 1.2.
Lens Firmware = 1.0.

I'll wait to hear from the shop.

Just thought you guys might be interested and I'll update you in case anyone else runs into this.

It's an odd one.

 

[Sangoma]

No idea.
Camera = 1.2.
Lens Firmware = 1.0.

I'll wait to hear from the shop.

Just thought you guys might be interested and I'll update you in case anyone else runs into this.

It's an odd one.

Looks like the camera is up to date

 

[woof woof]

Looks like the camera is up to date

I'm just reading on Panasonic site and I think the latest version is 1.3 but I'll hang on until I hear from the shop as if I brick it they'll say it's my fault I guess.

If they say "update the firmware" I will but only if they'll take a brick back for a refund if the worst happens.