1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

GX7 High Res Samples

Discussion in 'Panasonic Cameras' started by Djarum, Aug 9, 2013.

  1. Djarum

    Djarum Super Moderator

    Dec 15, 2009
    Huntsville, AL, USA
    Jason
  2. pdk42

    pdk42 One of the "Eh?" team

    Jan 11, 2013
    Leamington Spa, UK
    The ISO 1600 & 3200 high res look really usable. Maybe a little better than the OM-D (although I've not been able to use the raw files yet).
     
  3. stratokaster

    stratokaster Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jan 4, 2011
    Kyiv, Ukraine
    Pavel
  4. Manu-4Vendetta

    Manu-4Vendetta Mu-43 Top Veteran

    592
    Jul 8, 2011
    Dominican Republic
  5. b_rubenstein

    b_rubenstein Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 20, 2012
    Melbourne, FL
    It looks and measures (RGB values) awful.
     
  6. stratokaster

    stratokaster Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jan 4, 2011
    Kyiv, Ukraine
    Pavel
    I am very familiar with RPP and it's probably the worst RAW converter for high ISO images. It also can give all sorts of strange color casts (like violet in this case) when developing RAWs from unsupported cameras that lack proper color profiles. But I have used it for so long that I can predict what results the camera will produce in Lightroom by seeing what results it produces with RPP.

    (Although I agree that results look much worse than the E-PL5 RAW file developed in exactly the same manner. Nevermind the color cast or lack thereof for reasons discussed above, but color bleeding is much less pronounced and the luminance grain is tighter. So the sensor in the GX7 is probably not as good as the Sony one. Judging by the noise pattern I'd also say that Panasonic now uses some sort of noise reduction in RAW files.)
     
  7. dougjgreen

    dougjgreen Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 5, 2013
    San Diego
    Doug Green
    May I inquire as to what objective measuring scale you used that fed back a value of "awful", and where various other cameras scored on that same scale at ISO 6400?

    The white balance is off, which is adjustable, and the sort of thing I'd expect in pre-release firmware, but I personally would say that the noise level is definitely useable, and definitely better, for example, than my G5 is at 3200. Which again tells me that the camera is something more than 1 EV better than my G5.
     
  8. meyerweb

    meyerweb Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Sep 5, 2011
    I think that trying to reach ANY conclusions from a pre-production camera using an unsupported raw processor is a fools game. Just wait a bit until we have production samples and a raw processor that supports the files, and then you can start jumping to conclusions.
     
  9. htc

    htc Mu-43 Top Veteran

    579
    Jan 11, 2011
    Finland
    Harry
    +1

    On the other hand, if there's nothing else to do? :biggrin:
     
  10. stratokaster

    stratokaster Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jan 4, 2011
    Kyiv, Ukraine
    Pavel
    OK, I decided to get a little bit more scientific in my approach and measure RAW noise levels using an extremely useful tool called RawDigger.

    To do this, I imported RAW files from GX7 and E-PL5 into RawDigger and took readings of 3 samples located in large white/gray/black areas in the top half of the color chart:

    UMdW19bUCi9KzxswGW4Q.

    Olympus E-PL5 results:

    oQ256Dfd11CNSbyvnmgT.

    Panasonic GX7 results:

    2FpXQoVKcA9fFZrv1ui2.

    What we have to look at are average values of individual pixels and standard deviation based on selected samples. Because selected areas are uniform, pixel levels should be approximately the same and any deviation represents noise. But standard deviation in itself doesn't tell us much because an average value of 100 with standard deviation of 50 and an average value of 1000 with standard deviation of 50 are completely different things. That's why we have to compute relative standard deviation which is obtained by dividing standard deviation by average value. (%RSD = [SD / Avg]*100%)

    PeeXJGPL5uCiNO7dxvXy.

    I think the numbers speak for themselves. The GX7 has much better shadow noise at higher ISO values. However, it must be noted that those two cameras expose very differently with Panasonic supposedly protecting the shadows and Olympus protecting the highlights. Also either the sensor in the Olympus E-PL5 is much more sensitive to red or ePHOTOzine conducts their tests under different kinds of lighting. If I have to guess I'd say the Olympus shot was taken under incandescent light and the Panasonic one was taken under fluorescent light, judging by relative values of red/blue/green channels.
     
  11. meyerweb

    meyerweb Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Sep 5, 2011
    Take pictures? Or edit ones already taken?
     
  12. meyerweb

    meyerweb Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Sep 5, 2011
    Those results are interesting. I still think we need to wait for final firmware, and more controlled samples, to reach any solid conclusions. But the GX7 is looking good, for sure.
     
  13. b_rubenstein

    b_rubenstein Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 20, 2012
    Melbourne, FL
  14. RoadTraveler

    RoadTraveler Mu-43 All-Pro

    Nov 23, 2012
    Wow, that looks good to me. I've never used my GX1 up there as have it set to 3200 iso max, but maybe I should try it.

    I'm not against the grain :wink:, in fact some fast film grain often appeals to me, but I grew up viewing my dad's Leicaflex-made Tri-X photos.

    One would assume the GX7 will be better...
     
  15. stratokaster

    stratokaster Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jan 4, 2011
    Kyiv, Ukraine
    Pavel
    I added the data for Panasonic Lumix G6 into the mix. As expected, it performs quite a bit worse than both Lumix GX7 and Olympus E-PL5.

    2IsknWpwuo59kevtJRp1.
     
  16. Djarum

    Djarum Super Moderator

    Dec 15, 2009
    Huntsville, AL, USA
    Jason
    I'm a jpeg shooter, so jpegs matter to me. The most bothering thing with the gx7 jpegs at higher ISO is the yellow splotchiness on yhe grays and blacks. I'm not seeing a huge difference to the ep5 samples. Maybe half stop or less.
     
  17. Wasabi Bob

    Wasabi Bob Mu-43 Top Veteran

    I'm liking it

    Guys
    I've been test driving the GX7 and just posted some new photos, as high as ISO 2500. While not final firmware, it seems pretty decent.

    Dmc-gx7 - a set on Flickr
     
  18. b_rubenstein

    b_rubenstein Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 20, 2012
    Melbourne, FL
    Thank you for posting these pictures. The Steak and Taco based on the EXIF data looks like it was straight out of the camera. Was it? Also, was this and others (Bagel shop) with AWB? What about exposure? It looks good in all of the pictures; did you do much compensation in the camera or post?
     
  19. Wasabi Bob

    Wasabi Bob Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Reply

    WB was always AWB. No major adjustments except for a few of the indoor shots at the bar where I tweaked the color balance. The lighting was originally low, and very "warm" so I added a bit of blue. I intentionally did not use flash.

    A few shots were straight out of the camera.

    I've been reading this thread. Regarding the RAW files, until they reach v1.0, they are wasting their time. I had the chance to also use an early GH3. The early RAW files cannot be opened today with CS or SilkyPix. Any decoding at this stage is not really representative of the final quality. It's not likely that we will see v 1.0 for at least 2-3 weeks. I just read that most Japanese companies just closed for their two week summer holiday.
     
  20. b_rubenstein

    b_rubenstein Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 20, 2012
    Melbourne, FL
    One of the things I really like about the Olympus AWB, is the Keep Warm setting that when set to off give a neutral WB under tungsten lighting.