I Gave up the Panasonic G9 for? Sanity Check!

t2490jh

Mu-43 Rookie
Joined
May 6, 2020
Messages
16
If we want to post success photos we can all do that. For some reason people feel the need to make it personal. There's also a difference between fast and a moving subject.

Not fast:

View attachment 918735 B1_0017 by Shotglass Photo, on Flickr

Fast:

View attachment 918736 B1_0013 by Shotglass Photo, on Flickr

Fast:

View attachment 918737 DragsJune_0002_01 by Shotglass Photo, on Flickr

Not fast:

View attachment 918738 P1049147 by Shotglass Photo, on Flickr
I had the Sigma 56. Loved it - took very good pics. Only problem was the field of view - very restrictive. This is when I bought the Olympus 45mm 1.2. Between the two they are so similar. I think the Oly has slight better color rendition.
 

speedy

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Nov 27, 2015
Messages
2,696
If we want to post success photos we can all do that. For some reason people feel the need to make it personal. There's also a difference between fast and a moving subject.
Are you trying to say that I'm making this personal Brownie? Don't be shy, or infer things, just come out and say it directly to me if you are.
Once again, I'm not an m4/3/Panasonic zealot or evangelist, I own/owned other brands and formats, I'm simply relating what I've personally found.
 

speedy

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Nov 27, 2015
Messages
2,696
I can't properly speak to the current state of autofocus but the G7 I have was the second body Panasonic made with DFD. Never got AF changes in a firmware update and, whilst a D500 wasn't available, it noticeably outperformed the PDAF and hybrid bodies I was able to compare at the time. But DFD was often called uncompetitive then, too.

I think it's kind of like μ43 being dead. :laugh:
My experience is very similar to yours, and others. At the time of the GX8 release, the Canon 7D/II was current, from memory. Could be wrong, they were definitely both available/in use at the time though. There were people at the time, who owned both, and said the GX8 was comparable with the 7D. My mate owned a 7D at the time, I borrowed it for a little while, and would have to agree. My G9 is a good step up from that. I've shot then both (GX8 & G9) back to back at the race track, and this is without question, fact. How much of a step? Hard to put numbers on. I think you're right, that it just gets blown out of all proportion, because it's a little bit different. It may not be absolutely 100% as effective as phase detect in some situations, but that does not make it incompetent, or useless. Far, far from it, in my experience
 

saladin

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
May 29, 2015
Messages
2,371
Location
Melbourne
Real Name
jason
I may have to eat my words some time down the track. I see Panasonic has just confirmed that they have an 18mm S series prime under development. Something I've wanted in m4/3 forever (9mm rectilinear, AF). Depending on size, weight, aperture and cost, I might be tempted. That, and the 35, 50 & 85 f1.8 primes on an S5 would make a lovely, capable kit. Just shooting the breeze here 😜


Very similar to me, Speedy. Every now and then I consider whether a camera the size of the G9 makes much sense when I can get a FF body of comparable dimensions. I'm starting to focus (no pun) on the smaller size of MFT again and build a kit around the Em5 style bodies. Depending on how that goes, I might then consider a FF mirrorless as a 2nd system. The S5 appeals , as does a Nikon Z .

The difficulty arises though, as to overlapping use. If the Em5 is the everyday , small camera, then what role do the S5/Z5 fill ? They're basically general use cameras too. If anything, my 2nd use niche camera is probably better served for live sports use. The Z9 is so far out of budget it's not funny. So I find myself pondering a D500 and 200-500 for sports, and MFT for everything else. Or is the Em1X a good enough step up over the 5iii? Then I don't need to buy new lenses. The G9 isn't playing nicely with the O100-400 with the T/c . Would the PL telephoto be a more cost effective way to do things?


There's so much to consider. And no clear answers. But there IS a new Oly body coming. Soon. So I'll wait and see. It may provide some answers.
 

John King

Member of SOFA
Joined
Apr 20, 2020
Messages
3,732
Location
Beaumaris, Melbourne, Australia
Real Name
John ...
Very similar to me, Speedy. Every now and then I consider whether a camera the size of the G9 makes much sense when I can get a FF body of comparable dimensions. I'm starting to focus (no pun) on the smaller size of MFT again and build a kit around the Em5 style bodies. Depending on how that goes, I might then consider a FF mirrorless as a 2nd system. The S5 appeals , as does a Nikon Z .

The difficulty arises though, as to overlapping use. If the Em5 is the everyday , small camera, then what role do the S5/Z5 fill ? They're basically general use cameras too. If anything, my 2nd use niche camera is probably better served for live sports use. The Z9 is so far out of budget it's not funny. So I find myself pondering a D500 and 200-500 for sports, and MFT for everything else. Or is the Em1X a good enough step up over the 5iii? Then I don't need to buy ne
That's why I have the E-PM2, E-M1 MkI and E-M1 MkII, Jason.

Very different cameras, and sizes/weights, but can all use the same lenses ...
 

saladin

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
May 29, 2015
Messages
2,371
Location
Melbourne
Real Name
jason
That's why I have the E-PM2, E-M1 MkI and E-M1 MkII, Jason.

Very different cameras, and sizes/weights, but can all use the same lenses ...


Like you, John, I have a truckload of MFT bodies in the house, lol.

5 classic, 5ii (daughter 2) , 5iii, Gx800 (daughter 1) , G9, Gx8, Gm5 , Pen-F .

Goodness knows how my wife tolerates me!


What I'm finding isn't so much lack of outright IQ , but not-quite-what-i-want results for large field sports ( ie Aus Footy) , both in AF performance and IQ in lower winter light at extreme Tele lengths. What the solution is, and whether there's any point pursuing it, is what I'm mulling over. I was close to trading the G9 for an Em1X , just to see. But I'll probably wait for Jan/Feb and see what that brings. And with Covid restrictions lifting , I may get a chance to really practice with the 5iii . I'm sure I can do better with it given some continuity. And as mentioned elsewhere, I've ordered the new 20mm. I've no questions over the 5iii being a great option for compact travel. I also just updated my old Dxo software to the latest version for it's noise reduction abilities. That might lessen the need to look elsewhere for low light.

And finally, I've pledged to myself to print more. A pledge I've made before, quickly forget, and then remake. Because a lot of our perceived "failings" when we pixel peep completely vanish in prints.

And, final finally, I've been a bit depressed and unhappy with my own photography recently. Confidence can come and go, and I find a tendency in the down times to look at new gear as a salvation. It isn't. Likewise with my writing. Sometimes I think it's good. Sometimes I hate it. I've started - and scrapped - an update to my 5iii rolling review, several times over. Because the words and content just won't flow atm. It's tough going to work through things at times. But the hard yards have to be covered.
 
Last edited:

speedy

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Nov 27, 2015
Messages
2,696
Very similar to me, Speedy. Every now and then I consider whether a camera the size of the G9 makes much sense when I can get a FF body of comparable dimensions. I'm starting to focus (no pun) on the smaller size of MFT again and build a kit around the Em5 style bodies. Depending on how that goes, I might then consider a FF mirrorless as a 2nd system. The S5 appeals , as does a Nikon Z .

The difficulty arises though, as to overlapping use. If the Em5 is the everyday , small camera, then what role do the S5/Z5 fill ? They're basically general use cameras too. If anything, my 2nd use niche camera is probably better served for live sports use. The Z9 is so far out of budget it's not funny. So I find myself pondering a D500 and 200-500 for sports, and MFT for everything else. Or is the Em1X a good enough step up over the 5iii? Then I don't need to buy new lenses. The G9 isn't playing nicely with the O100-400 with the T/c . Would the PL telephoto be a more cost effective way to do things?


There's so much to consider. And no clear answers. But there IS a new Oly body coming. Soon. So I'll wait and see. It may provide some answers.
Hmmmm. As I've written previously, I'm not a birder, and don't require massive reach. I was pretty much happy with what my PL50-200 gave me, except for a couple of spots down at the Philip island GP circuit. I was tossing up between the Panny 1-300, & 1.4X Teleconverter, ironically the 1-300 being the cheaper option. Figure that one out. Anyway, the local camera store had the 1.4 Teleconverter on sale, so picked one up. I'm well pleased with it. Yet to get to Philip island to test it out on really fast subjects, but I can't say I've noticed any deterioration in AF speed/accuracy. This is with an f/2.8-4 lens though. I'd take a guess, and say your issue is with lack of light, f/9? it's starting to get rather dim. Only guessing. Luckily for me, my interests don't really fall in that area 😁 But to go there on larger formats gets big, heavy and expensive quickly. Even in m4/3 when you start looking at the Oly 150-400.
 
Last edited:

saladin

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
May 29, 2015
Messages
2,371
Location
Melbourne
Real Name
jason
Yep.

I can't wait to get back to PI for the MotoGP.

The 300/4 is also an option for our system, without going to stupidly huge dollars. As is the 200/2.8 , but probably a bit short in this conversation.

The 150-400 Pro will always be outside my spending capacity.
 

archaeopteryx

Gambian sidling bush
Joined
Feb 25, 2017
Messages
1,775
It may not be absolutely 100% as effective as phase detect in some situations, but that does not make it incompetent, or useless. Far, far from it, in my experience.
I've lost track of how many times I've posted on DFD-PDAF in autofocus threads but it's my sense much of it is PDAF gets assumed superior in forum punditry which, in effect, makes it a marketing checkbox. This approach mostly ignores the technology iteration that's happened as AF point arrays have expanded to cover the whole frame, processing engine computational ability's increased, and algorithms have adapted to more consideration of more data. It also rarely acknowledges increases in lens position data reported back to bodies, changes in AF motors, and splitting of focus groups for faster AF. The OSPDAF progression from single axis to cross type to DPAF to QPAF and lack of clarity on how often hybrid AF falls back to CDAF are also seldom mentioned. Neither is Panasonic's progression through three focus generations (v1 μ43 lenses, 240 fps μ43, and 480 fps L mount) and two or maybe three versions of DFD.

So it's difficult for me to subscribe to simplifications like PDAF good, DFD bad. Sony made algorithmic and maybe processing engine investments which have prompted catch up firmware releases by other ILC manufacturers, especially over the past couple years, and things are maybe starting to stratify by R&D spend and iterate with changes in processing engine generation. My questions are whether some durable differences emerge between manufacturers or if it'll be more technology leapfrogging, which will take time to determine, but first gen DFD and second gen Panasonic lens focusing (240 fps) is capable enough I don't anticipate being motivated to change systems or purchase a more recently released body on an AF basis.

Another mystery with Fuji is that they made the gripped X-H1 and then just discontinued it at fire sale prices. I guess maybe it didn’t resonate, but the next gripped body was the X-S10, which is similar, but not necessarily a successor.
I would say Fuji's the most experimental of the ILC manufacturers. Part of their X series approach seems to be try lots of body variations to find and then follow the most popular varieties. Sometimes this gets criticized as offering too much choice and potentially confusing customers but it seems to work well enough.

With the lockups, hard to tell. It's implausible Fuji isn't aware of the issue and, if it was an easy fix, certainly they've enough body iterations to have addressed it by now. In general, I'd describe Fuji as quirky. Sometimes that's good, sometimes it means things like building an entire series of bodies which flex enough they're a bit awkward to use on a tripod with mid-telephotos without lens collars.

It seems to be the nature of ILCs if you look closely enough there's always something. My G7 has a thing in post focus where sometimes every eighth frame in the video gets corrupted. Happens more often with some lenses than others, which is curious since the lens isn't involved in 4k recording, but the nature of focus bracketing means I can live with checking the stack, rebooting the camera, and reshooting. Since the camera's on a tripod and the subject's not going anywhere toggling the power switch and pressing the shutter again isn't usually a big deal. It'd be nice if stacks were quicker to load for checking but, within the context of the whole process, it's a minor delay.

I'm more hesitant about Fuji as reshooting a burst isn't usually an option. So far there don't seem to be complaints about the X-S10 but it's still fairly new.
 
Last edited:

The Electric Squirrel

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Jun 17, 2021
Messages
100
Location
Finland
I only have experience on this DFD vs OSPDAF vs DPAF debacle on three bodies I've owned, and those are the Panasonic GX80, Sony a7R III and Canon EOS R. What I can say, is that the Panasonic DFD system on the GX is not nearly as bad as I had come to expect from CDAF systems during my time with the Fuji X-Pro1. But it really isn't as good as Sony's hybrid OSPDAF or Canon's DPAF. The latter two I've a hard time putting in order, and all I can say is that Sony is (was, these are older bodies) a bit better with subject detection and maybe tracking in C-AF, but can't match the speed and confidence of the Canon in S-AF -mode.

But AF is only one thing on a camera. And how important it is, depends on what you want to photograph. There are other things to consider. Size and weight, for instance, and here you have to take the whole system in to account, not just the body. The big difference in size and weight between different formats comes from the lenses, not the bodies. Different people with different needs are able to live with different compromises, and that's why it's good we have several camera makers...
 

speedy

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Nov 27, 2015
Messages
2,696
The post was intended to show how size between formats is beginning to narrow, not to cherry pick a specific lens. It's not meant sway anyone's opinion and there's no need for anyone to defend their position, it's just conversation.

In this case we have a 24-200 M-4/3 equivalent lens/body which is larger than its FF counterpart. A few years ago that was almost unthinkable. The comment was directed at a post that stated people often don't consider size, which is incorrect. In fact, everyone with whom I have discussed the differences in ANY format discuss size as the very first consideration virtually every time, regardless of on which side of the fence they sit. After size is cost.

I was so naive about FF mirrorless that when I first held an S5 and a Z5 a few years ago I was literally shocked at how small they are. I was expecting DSLR size bodies based on comments from others about the size of FF gear. Of course we're comparing to a G9 here, not one of the smaller bodies, but it was still very much unexpected.
Just shooting the breeze here, but I still have a little collection of EF, EF-S & EF-M glass, adapter & flashes etc. I have lots of patience, so I'm waiting for the apparent inevitable death of the EOSM, & I'll grab a cheap, dual pixel 24MP body. Just to see what all the dual pixel AF raving is about. I still have my 55-250 STM and adapter sitting in the cupboard -which is an excellent little lens that punches WELL above its weight, and see how it goes. Once the bodies get down around the sub $500 Au mark anyway. I have no intention of replacing my m4/3 kit with it, just plain curious. Could be an option for yourself, toss in the much under rated yet excellent EF 70-300L, and run with that for a while at very little cost
 
Joined
Dec 26, 2019
Messages
45
Well, like I said previously, I did some math and decided to keep my M43 gear, of which most was purchased used in "like new" condition for 50% or more off, and instead of paying for FF, I just splurged on Topaz Image Quality Bundle for $85 USD after 75% off (Black Friday and Petr Bambousek's discounts).
I have also purchased Petr's "Olympus for Wildlife" video tutorial for $35 USD after 50% off... and a couple of weeks ago I also purchased a mint PanaLeica 25 f1.4 for $320 CAD. I think I am ready for pretty much anything now :ninja:

If anyone is interested below are direct links to the products and a cool video on a LR+PS+TOPAZ workflow:
Topaz Image Quality Bundle (scroll to bottom)
Petr's blog post on Topaz with the discount code
Olympus Wildlife Tutorial
LR+PS+TOPAZ Workflow Tutorial

I hope this post will help keep some of us in the M43 camp :drinks:
 

Brownie

Thread Killer Extraordinaire
Joined
Sep 3, 2018
Messages
4,529
Location
SE Michigan
Real Name
Tim
I hope this post will help keep some of us in the M43 camp :drinks:
Interestingly, in 94 posts (now 95) not a single person has left M-4/3. Not one. Those that have ventured into FF or a Fuji have done so as a second system, or gone and returned, or came here from another system. Given that, I think we're safe as a group.
 

Mike Wingate

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Feb 21, 2017
Messages
3,772
Location
Altrincham
Real Name
Mike Wingate
Not leaving, not replacing, sticking with, using. Liking, not heavy, not overly expensive. Wide to long telephoto. 7-300mm range. Fits in bags.
 

Darmok N Jalad

Temba, his aperture wide
Joined
Sep 6, 2019
Messages
2,257
Location
Tanagra (not really)
Interestingly, in 94 posts (now 95) not a single person has left M-4/3. Not one. Those that have ventured into FF or a Fuji have done so as a second system, or gone and returned, or came here from another system. Given that, I think we're safe as a group.
I‘m pretty sure that there were frequent posters here when I joined a couple years ago that are no longer posting. I think many of those that moved on from M43 also moved on from the forum. Hard to say for sure since many folks haven’t been working/shooting in the last couple years, too.
 

Brownie

Thread Killer Extraordinaire
Joined
Sep 3, 2018
Messages
4,529
Location
SE Michigan
Real Name
Tim
I‘m pretty sure that there were frequent posters here when I joined a couple years ago that are no longer posting. I think many of those that moved on from M43 also moved on from the forum. Hard to say for sure since many folks haven’t been working/shooting in the last couple years, too.
Sure there are, I'm not suggesting no one has ever 'moved over', but nobody in this thread has completely divested themselves of their M-4/3 gear. I see some of our MIAs on other forums, many of whom continue to post images from M-4/3 gear, just not here. I think that since most manufacturer specific forums are fairly unforgiving when it comes to posting from other gear, they'd prefer wider acceptance. We aren't too bad here. Although I've seen a few snarky remarks, by and large we let everyone play. Yeah, we have our 'other systems' forum, but that's like being sent to a basement office with your stapler...
 

doady

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
May 18, 2020
Messages
705
Location
Canada
$320 CAD for Panasonic 25mm F1.4 probably wouldn't seem like such a good deal if people realized it is actually a F2.8 lens. Unless people start recognizing those gaps, it will be difficult to finally begin moving past them, and towards full frame.
 

D7k1

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Nov 18, 2013
Messages
2,951
$320 CAD for Panasonic 25mm F1.4 probably wouldn't seem like such a good deal if people realized it is actually a F2.8 lens. Unless people start recognizing those gaps, it will be difficult to finally begin moving past them, and towards full frame.
Failed your physics class did you? :yahoo: The f-stop, which is also known as the f-number, is the ratio of the lens focal length to the diameter of the entrance pupil. This determines the amount of light that is gathered and transmitted (depending on quality of glass and coatings) to the focus point of the lens.
 

Latest threads

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Forum GIFs powered by GIPHY: https://giphy.com/
Copyright © Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom