Hello Panasonic You Screwed Up

[wjiang]

The GM5 is just such a beautiful thing. Sure, it has its limitations, but even so I'd say it does pretty well considering its size, and I find a small viewfinder much better than no viewfinder on a bright sunny day, even wearing glasses.

I have a feeling that it will be viewed as something of a design classic in years to come, together with its trio of matching lenses: the 12-32/3.5-5.6, 35-100/4-5.6 and 15/1.7. Understated, functional gems of miniaturization.

Don't forget the 42.5mm f/1.7.

 

[RAH]

I would argue that the downfall was 1" compacts. RX100 and the like beat the GM5 at it's own game.

I agree with you somewhat, although looking for a one-inch sensor camera is what alerted me to buy my GM5. I was just doing searches to see what was available and there was the GM5, new, on a closeout at Adorama for $440. Kind of a no-brainer, considering the high price of the latest 1-inchers. But, of course, that was just a lucky accident.

I suppose the question is - if they were still offering the GM5 (or GM7 by now), would I buy it (at full price) or a 1-incher. I still think I'd get the GM, but this is pie in the sky anyway. Actually, I think the GM5 would be TERRIBLE at pie-in-flight shots!

 

[Lumix G Experience UK]

I have the GM1 and GM5, but now never use them because I also have the GX800. It comes with me everywhere like a loyal dog. I prefer it over the previous models because the handling is so much better - especially the rear wheel. Stick a nice lens on and the images it produces are fabulous. This one was shot with the 42.5mm f/1.2

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[Turbofrog]

I have the GM1 and GM5, but now never use them because I also have the GX800. It comes with me everywhere like a loyal dog. I prefer it over the previous models because the handling is so much better - especially the rear wheel. Stick a nice lens on and the images it produces are fabulous. This one was shot with the 42.5mm f/1.2

That is definitely a nice photo, though I don't know how many people are putting $1500 lenses on their GX800!

Handling-wise, I still have never been able to get comfortable with the flat-dial interface cameras. I actually think that's the clickable embedded horizontal dial on the GM5 is the real biggest upgrade of that camera over the GM1, not the tiny EVF. That clickable dial and the shapely grip really meant that the old GX1 was a great handling camera, despite not having an EVF and only a single (dual-duty) command dial. It felt much more powerful than it 'deserved to', in my opinion.

I wish that Panasonic would use that on their low end (GXx00 / GFx) line, instead of the flat rotary dials that feel synonymous with low-end compacts to me.

 

[Luke]

man, that background is smooth. I can't afford any lens-related GAS...I gotta go

 

[Lumix G Experience UK]

That is definitely a nice photo, though I don't know how many people are putting $1500 lenses on their GX800!

Handling-wise, I still have never been able to get comfortable with the flat-dial interface cameras. I actually think that's the clickable embedded horizontal dial on the GM5 is the real biggest upgrade of that camera over the GM1, not the tiny EVF. That clickable dial and the shapely grip really meant that the old GX1 was a great handling camera, despite not having an EVF and only a single (dual-duty) command dial. It felt much more powerful than it 'deserved to', in my opinion.

I wish that Panasonic would use that on their low end (GXx00 / GFx) line, instead of the flat rotary dials that feel synonymous with low-end compacts to me.

Yes, my heart sank when I saw they'd gone back to the wheel instead of the buttons, as on the GM1 I always pressed when I wanted to turn. But on the GX800 they've actually reinvented the wheel and it's much easier to operation. The great advantage is that you can press to select and turn to adjust all in the same place - so I find it quicker than the previous versions and more reliable.

Frankly, I prefer to put a high quality lens on a low cost camera than to put a low cost lens on a high quality camera. The first thing the viewer sees is the characteristic of the lens - not the sensor. It seem extravagant to pair this lens and this body, but I love the pictures they produce and that I can take them anywhere together - and in my head those are the most important considerations. Put that lens on a G9 and you stand out. Put it on the GX800 and no one pays you any attention.

 

[wjiang]

The wheel was much improved on the GF7 and newer compared to the GM1. I find it much easier to use and no more accidental presses - I still had accidental presses on the GM5 (I've owned GM1, GM5, GF7 and GX850).

 

[palombasso]

I used the GM1 + Grip + 14-140 II a lot in a trip to Boston last year. Better handling and flexibility than I expected. The small silver grip makes it MUCH better to handle.
Bought the G85 at the same trip but looking at the daylight pictures of both there's almost no difference.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Boston

 

[davidzvi]

Don't forget the 42.5mm f/1.7.

And the 14mm f/2.5.

 

[Lumix G Experience UK]

And the 14mm f/2.5.

Yes, the 14mm is the perfect match. Just the right size so the whole kit slips into a jacket pocket.

 

[Mike Wingate]

I think a 3 sensor/3 lens iPhone could replace my GM5. Give me 28, 50, and 90mm equivalent lenses built in, and my GM5 would likely become a dedicated fisheye camera.

I've tried add-on iPhone lenses and they don't work for me: too much trouble for too little gain.

I have found that the clip on macro close up lens is brilliant on both my iphone 4 and 8 plus. Try again and get close.

 

[CWRailman]

I often wonder how discussions get so far off topic. Now this thread seems to be about cell phones. Very strange!

 

[Mike Wingate]

I have some M43 kit, but also take photos on my phone. The best camera is the one you have at the time.

 

[Hans Nikesch]

I love my GM5 and use it for everything but wildlife. I'm not too happy with the shutter for adapting lenses so I stopped doing that. The kit lens and the 35-100 make a great combo and are super sharp.

 

[Helgestahill]

Yes, the 14mm is the perfect match. Just the right size so the whole kit slips into a jacket pocket.

Yes it is!
GM5 and 14mm f/2.5

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[DHart]

I think the GM5 (yes I have one) is a bit of a "specialty" camera, therefore the sales were not sufficient for Panasonic to keep making it. For general use, it's really too small - even though the form factor may be appropriate once in a while. This is undoubtedly why sales were not sufficient to maintain production of it.

While I appreciate the super small form factor on a rare occasion, my GM5 sits idle nearly all the time.

My most used body is the GX8, which has come to be my absolute favorite m4/3 body, of the many that I've owned. The GX7 is something of a close second to the GX8.

I keep the tiny GM5 around, just in case I might want to use it. It's a nice and tiny imaging machine with the stellar 12-32 compact lens - I just don't need anything that small most of the time, and much prefer bodies that are more hand-filling, generally.

Since buying the GX8, I haven't seen a newer m4/3 body that is "right" enough to bump my GX8. I'll be keeping it and using it as my primary body until such a time as a worthy successor appears. Part of the worthiness factor involves an ample finger hold grip. Both the GX7 and the GX8 are excellent in this regard and, to me, that's a major factor in a camera body.

 

[speedy]

Well, I went the opposite direction. Started with mirrorless with the original EOSM. Too small and slippery to comfortably hold. Yes, they are a marvel of miniaturization, but not real world usage. And I'm no giant. My HUGE GX8, is much nicer. My G9, perfect. About the same size as my much loved 550D, but way more capable, and with a brilliant range of tiny, gem like lenses.
I personally don't really get the micro camera lust. But that's just me

 

[Wasabi Bob]

Can you explain this? As you've pointed out, battery charging is provided from USB and operating load is supplied from the battery. It therefore follows a minimal implementation need only disable the charging boost converter whilst the camera is sufficiently active. No hardware changes are required, so the larger supply assertion doesn't hold and efficiency related dissipation terms are nominally unchanged. As I understand the supply network in typical cameras, more sophisticated load balancing implementations doesn't necessarily require both larger size and greater dissipation. Design selection can be made for one or the other exclusively or the operating envelope constrained such that dissipation doesn't increase.

It's very simple - the USB charging section is not capable of supplying enough power by itself to run the camra. The battery is required to make up the difference. While a larger battery could provide more power, the USB power section can't handle the additional power.

 

[archaeopteryx]

The measurements of mirrorless I've come across generally indicate average battery draws in the 100-600 mA range depending what the camera's doing, which is a nominal upper bound around 4.3W from a 7.2V battery. I haven't looked at Olympus but it happens 4.3W is comparable to the average rate power flows into the battery during charging for Panasonic---bit lower on the GX85 and a little higher on the G9. Given variation from smart charging, peak charge rate is likely 5W, perhaps more. (The USB battery charging specification allows 15+W, though USB chargers running from mains are often 10W and 5-10W is typical of battery power banks.)

As such, the assumption a USB charging supply would need to handle more watts to power the camera than to charge the battery appears questionable. Briefly switching to the battery to handle load spikes associated with image capture might be an exception. But one measurement I've found has the G9 taking a maximum of 1A from USB during video, consistent with other runtime results from shooting from USB power packs.