"Panasonic G series" Owners Thread

Despite all my rhetoric I've gone back to the 8-18. In fact, I've sold all my primes except the Panasonic 20mm. Basically down to my laziness disliking changing lenses.
 
Stephen L said:
Despite all my rhetoric I've gone back to the 8-18. In fact, I've sold all my primes except the Panasonic 20mm. Basically down to my laziness disliking changing lenses.
Click to expand...

Not sure it is laziness, or just plain convenience :)

What is nice about the Lumix lens series is that with three lenses you can have a huge range, and I find I rarely change on one outing. 7-14, 14-140 and 100-400.

I also have a 20 1.7, and I enjoy the 9mm "lens cap", neither of which I would part with.
 
Stephen L said:
Despite all my rhetoric I've gone back to the 8-18. In fact, I've sold all my primes except the Panasonic 20mm. Basically down to my laziness disliking changing lenses.
Click to expand...

I have a 20mm f1.7 on my GM5 and it's the only lens I use on it but it does have drawbacks and if I wasn't trying for the most compact camera and lens package I'd use the Oly 17mm f1.8 which I also have.

Anyway. GM5 and 20mm f1.8 snap.

NijyxIF.jpg


I can't remember the last time I used my Oly 9-18mm. I keep meaning to give it a day out.
 
Last edited:
Stephen L said:
Despite all my rhetoric I've gone back to the 8-18. In fact, I've sold all my primes except the Panasonic 20mm. Basically down to my laziness disliking changing lenses.
Click to expand...
I also dislike changing lenses, only prime I use these days is the aforementioned 9mm.
Its been on my GX9 for ages and used it when I really needed something longer.

Main reason I would never sell my 12-100, that's stuck to the G9 and likely to stay there for the duration.
 
These were taken a few weeks ago with the 7-14, mainly at the 7 end, basically repeating shots I took with the 12-60 earlier this year, except there was no sun this time.
I suspect that maybe the 9mm might not suit me as well.


2.jpg6.jpg7.jpg8.jpg12a.jpg13.jpg
 
Sangoma said:
These were taken a few weeks ago with the 7-14, mainly at the 7 end, basically repeating shots I took with the 12-60 earlier this year, except there was no sun this time.
I suspect that maybe the 9mm might not suit me as well.


View attachment 367233View attachment 367234View attachment 367235View attachment 367236View attachment 367237View attachment 367238
Click to expand...
Probably not, that extra 2mm makes a lot of difference at the wide end.
Pretty sure that's Coventry, many years ago spent a few days moored up at the canal basin.
Number five is my favourite, can't beat a bit of ultra wide photography
 
Last edited:
tijuana taxi said:
Probably not, that extra 2mm makes a lot of difference at the wide end.
Pretty sure that's Coventry, many years ago spent a few days moored up at the canal basin.
Number five is my favourite, can't beat a bit of ultra wide photography
Click to expand...
Yes, it is Coventry.

And the canal basin (or part of it)
18.jpg
 
Sangoma said:
These were taken a few weeks ago with the 7-14, mainly at the 7 end, basically repeating shots I took with the 12-60 earlier this year, except there was no sun this time.
I suspect that maybe the 9mm might not suit me as well.


View attachment 367233View attachment 367234View attachment 367235View attachment 367236View attachment 367237View attachment 367238
Click to expand...
I especially like the first of the Coventry Cathedral ones. The clouds are great. No apparent distortion.
 
Fuji Dave said:
Hope the thread title might change to all Panasonic cameras, then I can post my LX100 II shots in here as can't see my thread on the LX100 ones picking up.
Click to expand...
Still waiting for a response from the OP. Maybe a mod can advise? @Cobra ?
 
Last edited:
Stephen L said:
I especially like the first of the Coventry Cathedral ones. The clouds are great. No apparent distortion.
Click to expand...
Thanks, but the clouds were a bit of luck, they were thicker than they had been at that time, the sun is behind them on the right. Other times the brighter parts of the clouds were burnt out.
 
Last edited:
d00d said:
Thanks. They were taken with the 12-60 kit lens. I hope you've still got yours.
Click to expand...
Yes, I have. Seems as good as the PanaLeica version, bar the maximum aperture. Paired with the 8-18 it's all I really need. Maybe a little extra length would be useful, but not often.
 
d00d said:
Thanks. They were taken with the 12-60 kit lens. I hope you've still got yours.
Click to expand...

AHEM I do believe some Lumix kits include the PanaLeica, but yes I meant the cheaper version.

BTW My GX80 came with the little 12-32, but I didn't like it.
 
Using the G100 I think the DR and general IQ is shading the GX9. They're both 20mp cameras but maybe the newer G100 is doing something different in camera with the raws? It might be just the light and conditions on the day and so pot luck so I may try and take the same picture with each camera and see how they compare side by side.

I don't suppose anyone else has compared these or other 20mp cameras and seen any differences?
 
Last edited:
I am looking for a travel telephoto option, I have narrowed it down to following options
Panasonic 14-140mm
Tamron 14-150mm
Panasonic 45-175mm

I like the 45-175mm as it has the longest reach, doesn't extend and has the same 46mm filter thread as all my other lenses.
but looking online people seem to suggest 14-140mm more often.

Which option has the best image quality? (happy to consider Olympus or other m43 lenses also)
Main priority is sharpness at telephoto end followed by size/weight.

If it matters will be used on a G100.
 
I have the Panasonic 45-150mm and I have no complaints plus it's relatively small and light.

One I would not recommend is the old 45-200mm. I struggled to get a sharp picture out of mine.
 
nandbytes said:
I am looking for a travel telephoto option, I have narrowed it down to following options
Panasonic 14-140mm
Tamron 14-150mm
Panasonic 45-175mm

I like the 45-175mm as it has the longest reach, doesn't extend and has the same 46mm filter thread as all my other lenses.
but looking online people seem to suggest 14-140mm more often.

Which option has the best image quality? (happy to consider Olympus or other m43 lenses also)
Main priority is sharpness at telephoto end followed by size/weight.

If it matters will be used on a G100.
Click to expand...
I've not tried any of those lenses, but I'm inherently wary of super-zooms (with the exception of the Oly 12-100) so on paper the 45-175 would be my choice.
 
I also have the 45-150 and recommend it. I believe the 45-175 has a motorised zoom, but I don't have any experience with it. When I was researching online, the general consensus was that the 45-150 was ranked as one of the better Panasonic budget telephoto lenses and the 45-200 ranked as the worst. The 35-100 is also meant to be very good in either version.
 
Stephen L said:
I've not tried any of those lenses, but I'm inherently wary of super-zooms (with the exception of the Oly 12-100) so on paper the 45-175 would be my choice.
Click to expand...
that's what I thought but there are a lot of people on the internet swearing by the 14-140mm. So it got me thinking....
 
woof woof said:
I have the Panasonic 45-150mm and I have no complaints plus it's relatively small and light.

One I would not recommend is the old 45-200mm. I struggled to get a sharp picture out of mine.
Click to expand...
CSB said:
I also have the 45-150 and recommend it. I believe the 45-175 has a motorised zoom, but I don't have any experience with it. When I was researching online, the general consensus was that the 45-150 was ranked as one of the better Panasonic budget telephoto lenses and the 45-200 ranked as the worst. The 35-100 is also meant to be very good in either version.
Click to expand...
Thanks, did take a look at 45-150mm, it has a slightly larger filter thread but seems to have the best reviews of the lot in terms of sharpness.

I have 35-100mm f4-5.6. Very nice lens indeed, just not long enough.
 
woof woof said:
Using the G100 I think the DR and general IQ is shading the GX9. They're both 20mp cameras but maybe the newer G100 is doing something different in camera with the raws? It might be just the light and conditions on the day and so pot luck so I may try and take the same picture with each camera and see how they compare side by side.

I don't suppose anyone else has compared these or other 20mp cameras and seen any differences?
Click to expand...

I never really understood Panasonic and their sensors tbh.
On Sony and Nikon they all basically reuse the same sensors and processors. So there is not much difference in image quality between bodies of similar generation (sometimes even 2-3 generations).
But their G-series sensors do have more dynamic range than GX-series.
So for example G9 has more dynamic range than GX9.
Not sure if G100 is considering one of "G-series"
 
Stephen L said:
I've not tried any of those lenses, but I'm inherently wary of super-zooms (with the exception of the Oly 12-100) so on paper the 45-175 would be my choice.
Click to expand...
I have both an early and a later 14-140 (one Mega OIS and the newer one Power OIS. I also have the 45-150 and the 45-200.

All are good, but for travel the 14-140 Power OIS is by far the nicest.
You only need to carry one lens, it is sharp and if the camera supports Dual OIS all the better
 
If I were to buy a do it all variable aperture zoom it would be the Panasonic 14-140 ii
Did consider and research it for a little while, mainly for something lighter than my 12-100 for travel.
From experience I know 14mm isn't wide enough for me so gave up on that idea.
 
tijuana taxi said:
If I were to buy a do it all variable aperture zoom it would be the Panasonic 14-140 ii
Did consider and research it for a little while, mainly for something lighter than my 12-100 for travel.
From experience I know 14mm isn't wide enough for me so gave up on that idea.
Click to expand...

I never considered the 14-140mm, probably because it wasn't out at the time I was buying but looking at the pictures on the comparison site it doesn't look all that much bigger than the 45-150mm. I don't know about the weight though, that'd need checking... so I did check... 45=150mm=200g. 14-140mm=265g.

Compact Camera Meter

Compare unlimited number of cameras with lenses, see how compact or bulky a camera is and sort by height, width, depth and weight.
camerasize.com

It could well be worth a look.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
I never considered the 14-140mm, probably because it wasn't out at the time I was buying but looking at the pictures on the comparison site it doesn't look all that much bigger than the 45-150mm. I don't know about the weight though, that'd need checking... so I did check... 45=150mm=200g. 14-140mm=265g.

Compact Camera Meter

Compare unlimited number of cameras with lenses, see how compact or bulky a camera is and sort by height, width, depth and weight.
camerasize.com

It could well be worth a look.
Click to expand...
Considered by many to be the best available lens of its type, and weather resistant too.
The latest and best version has the model no H-FSA14140, not to be confused with earlier iterations.

Here is a video comparing it to the well thought of Pana Leica 12-60
 
tijuana taxi said:
Considered by many to be the best available lens of its type, and weather resistant too.
The latest and best version has the model no H-FSA14140, not to be confused with earlier iterations.

Here is a video comparing it to the well thought of Pana Leica 12-60
Click to expand...
Very interesting, even if it is death by Powerpoint
 
I love my PanaLumix 45-150, used it nearly all the time for about a year till I got my PanaLumix 12-60mm.

I love it at 12mm, don't ever need any wider, so my 7-14 never gets any use. And the 12-60 focuses close and fast.

60mm is long enough for me for a general walkabout lens, especially considering you can get away with a massive crop most of the time.
 
The 14-140 and 12-60 are almost identical size (retracted) and I just weighed them 307g and 261g.
They are both very good, I think better that the Canon 18-135 or 18-200, but much lighter.

I didn't know the 14-140 was so highly rated, but found it to be excellent.

I love the 7-14 as well though :)
 
tijuana taxi said:
Considered by many to be the best available lens of its type, and weather resistant too.
The latest and best version has the model no H-FSA14140, not to be confused with earlier iterations.
Click to expand...

One thing that pushed this lens off my radar in the past was that it is AFAIK one of the lenses potentially affected by shutter shock. Luckily and AFAIK the cameras I have now shouldn't suffer SS. It does look tempting as a one lens to do a lot of stuff solution.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
One thing that pushed this lens off my radar in the past was that it is AFAIK one of the lenses potentially affected by shutter shock. Luckily and AFAIK the cameras I have now shouldn't suffer SS. IT does look tempting as a one lens to do a lot of stuff solution.
Click to expand...
Is there any real difference between the V1 and V2, apart from a minuscule aperture variation? The first version are going for sensible prices.
 
Stephen L said:
Is there any real difference between the V1 and V2, apart from a minuscule aperture variation? The first version are going for sensible prices.
Click to expand...
Yes, the 2 supports dual OIS

There is some confusion on the later ones model numbers, but if it is Power OIS, it supports dual
 
Stephen L said:
Is there any real difference between the V1 and V2, apart from a minuscule aperture variation? The first version are going for sensible prices.
Click to expand...
Its not so simple as ver 1 and 2, there are about four 14-140 lenses.
The most recent one model no H-FSA14140 is the highly rated and most expensive one. Apart from anything else it has gained weather sealing which might make quite a difference to some users. Probably also has dual is 2 on cameras that support it.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top