Panasonic Kills GM & GF Lines

ijm5012

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
Oct 2, 2013
Messages
7,963
Location
Pittsburgh, PA
Real Name
Ian
Exactly that what I mean: This is the abuse! (I had the Hassy in my hands last friday... It´s an amazing camera. Let´s see how the images will look like...)
I'm sure it'll be killer. You should sell all your m43 gear in anticipation of purchasing a Hassy.

You should only need a couple extra grand after selling your m43 gear, but it'll definitely be worth it.
 

ijm5012

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
Oct 2, 2013
Messages
7,963
Location
Pittsburgh, PA
Real Name
Ian
And let's be realistic, the Hasselblad makes literally every other camera look ridiculous in the sensor size vs. body size comparison. "What you mean your A7r II is that big and it's only got a sensor that's 40% smaller than mine?!"

Until, as you say, lenses come into the picture. Hasselblad's two current lenses are competitive with M4/3 in terms of aperture equivalence...
That's the point I was trying to make, that it's not all about size of the camera body, but rather the whole system. Unfortunately, camerasize.com doesn't have any Hassy lenses available for selecting.

People love to bitch about how large the GH4 and EM1 are, and how it goes against the entire philosophy of the m43 system. But the reality is there are plenty of small m43 camera out there to fit their midget hands, and m43 is still smaller when you slap a lens on the from of the camera, since you can't really take a picture with a lens mounted.
 

astrostl

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Oct 4, 2014
Messages
538
Location
St. Louis, MO
Real Name
Justin Honold
The "convertible" nature of MFT is a lot of what I love about it: tiny (GM1 + 12-32) to big (E-M1 + 12-40), with compatible glass.
 

Turbofrog

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
Mar 21, 2014
Messages
5,362
Exactly that what I mean: This is the abuse! (I had the Hassy in my hands last friday... It´s an amazing camera. Let´s see how the images will look like...)
I'm not quite sure that it's vindication of your words to say "every camera on the market than isn't a $9000 Hasselblad that is sold out for the next year is crap because it's way too big for its sensor."

Seeing and holding the GX8 in person, it was a lot smaller than I was expecting it to be. Certainly not small, but in my hands it didn't feel any larger than my GX7 + thumb grip, which is how I like the ergonomics. It has a built in thumb grip so I don't need the aftermarket one to feel comfortable holding larger lenses. It's the same size as the E-M1, and functionally identical in form factor to the X-T2, X-Pro2, and A7 II-series that it competes with.

I guess I am mostly just curious about why the GX8's size is such a hang-up? Is it because it is harder to pack in a bag? Because I find that not having the viewfinder hump actually makes it easier to fit into and out of most camera bags (unless I've totally zipped the whole panel open, in which case it's irrelevant). Is it because of the feel in the hand? Because that's more about weight than size for me. Is it the aesthetic?
 
Last edited:

speedy

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Nov 27, 2015
Messages
2,168
Exactly that what I mean: This is the abuse! (I had the Hassy in my hands last friday... It´s an amazing camera. Let´s see how the images will look like...)
What exactly is this "abuse" you keep banging on about? I don't know anyone who goes shopping for an m4/3 camera/system who has ever come home with a medium format instead. They're not even on the same planet, let alone in the same universe. You seem fixated on one single, solitary aspect rather than considering things as a whole complete system.
 

JoFT

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Nov 11, 2014
Messages
363
Location
Stuttgart
Real Name
Johannes
I'm not quite sure that it's vindication of your words to say "every camera on the market than isn't a $9000 Hasselblad that is sold out for the next year is crap because it's way too big for its sensor."

Seeing and holding the GX8 in person, it was a lot smaller than I was expecting it to be. Certainly not small, but in my hands it didn't feel any larger than my GX7 + thumb grip, which is how I like the ergonomics. It has a built in thumb grip so I don't need the aftermarket one to feel comfortable holding larger lenses. It's the same size as the E-M1, and functionally identical in form factor to the X-T2, X-Pro2, and A7 II-series that it competes with.

I guess I am mostly just curious about why the GX8's size is such a hang-up? Is it because it is harder to pack in a bag? Because I find that not having the viewfinder hump actually makes it easier to fit into and out of most camera bags (unless I've totally zipped the whole panel open, in which case it's irrelevant). Is it because of the feel in the hand? Because that's more about weight than size for me. Is it the aesthetic?
It is very simple: My GM1is very tiny. And it's image quality is superb. For M43... But I know when to take FF. And maybe a Hassy in the future...
The
 

JoFT

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Nov 11, 2014
Messages
363
Location
Stuttgart
Real Name
Johannes
What exactly is this "abuse" you keep banging on about? I don't know anyone who goes shopping for an m4/3 camera/system who has ever come home with a medium format instead. They're not even on the same planet, let alone in the same universe. You seem fixated on one single, solitary aspect rather than considering things as a whole complete system.
Speedy: I always see the system as whole. And size matters. I am carrying gear a lot! Therefore I was considering the A7 series with Batis lenses seriously. But the Hassy has most of the topics missing at the A7... At the sine size! And the lenses are a bit more, but the new Leica lenses are not too fare away with their form factor...
 

ijm5012

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
Oct 2, 2013
Messages
7,963
Location
Pittsburgh, PA
Real Name
Ian
It is very simple: My GM1is very tiny. And it's image quality is superb.
Yes, it's also hampered by its design, only being able to use a fully mechanical shutter up to 1/500th of a second, and reverting to the e-shutter beyond that, which is entirely counterintuitive because one would typically want quicker shutter speeds to freeze action, but with the GM1 it results in wonderful, matrix-style jello-o shots due to the e-shutter. Or is it the 1/50th max flash sync speed that you love so much? Or how about only having a single control dial to adjust all of your exposure parameters from? Or the lack of any EVF option? Or the lack of any tilting LCD option? Or the tiny fiddly buttons?

But yes, you're right that size should come at the expense of usability...
 

ijm5012

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
Oct 2, 2013
Messages
7,963
Location
Pittsburgh, PA
Real Name
Ian
Speedy: I always see the system as whole. And size matters. I am carrying gear a lot! Therefore I was considering the A7 series with Batis lenses seriously. But the Hassy has most of the topics missing at the A7... At the sine size! And the lenses are a bit more, but the new Leica lenses are not too fare away with their form factor...
You do realize that the TWO AVAILABLE LENSES for the Hassy are slower than their FF counterparts, even when you consider "total light", right? So with the lenses available, you're actually not gaining anything with the Hassy over say an A7R II, other than the fact that you can go around beating your chest shouting "I SHOOT MEDIUM FORMAT! DOWN WITH ALL OF YOU FULL FRAME PLEBEIANS!"
 

Turbofrog

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
Mar 21, 2014
Messages
5,362
You do realize that the TWO AVAILABLE LENSES for the Hassy are slower than their FF counterparts, even when you consider "total light", right? So with the lenses available, you're actually not gaining anything with the Hassy over say an A7R II, other than the fact that you can go around beating your chest shouting "I SHOOT MEDIUM FORMAT! DOWN WITH ALL OF YOU FULL FRAME PLEBEIANS!"
Well, to be fair, in any non-light limited situation (i.e. most landscape shooting) where you can use base ISO, you should get 2/3 stop of dynamic range, improved tonality, and more resolution. Honestly, the pre-production samples DPReview shot have better per-pixel image quality than I have ever seen from any full-frame camera, and there are 50 million of them! They are detailed to the point of being almost invasive, even in a full head-and-shoulders portrait. I'm sure a lot of that is because the Hassy lenses are big, slow, and very expensive, so they had better be outstanding and give no indication to the contrary.

Obviously it's well, well up the ramp of diminishing returns, and in ordinary use, I doubt I would notice the difference between it and an A7r II. But if we're honest, that camera is also, deep into diminishing returns territory. The Hassy certainly isn't 3x better than an A7r II, but just the same, an A7r II sure isn't 3x better than a GX8. Where you draw the line of quality vs. value is obviously a personal choice.

Basically, it's the difference between m4/3 and APS-C. So, depending on who you ask, either a huge amount, or nothing at all...
 
Last edited:

lenshoarder

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Nov 7, 2010
Messages
1,324
It's probably not that surprising. Given the corner quality of most of the Sony APS-C lenses, I suspect that they cover a very similar image circle as M4/3 lenses. That is, they cover exactly what they need, while M4/3 covers larger than they need in order to improve corner performance.
Your suspicion is not true. I am one of the few people that have been foolish enough to try to adapt M43 lenses onto e-mount cameras. On a APS-C sized sensor, M43 lenses have a small image circle. About the same as what a c-mount lens covers. So for the most part, M43 lenses only have an image circle large enough to cover the sensor. There may be a few that have larger image circles but there is at least one M43 camera with a lens that does not even cover the entire sensor. If it exists, any corner performance advantage is more likely due to the fact the M43 has a relatively long registration distance compared to e-mount. Thus more rays are closer to perpendicular. E-mount has a much larger sensor yet the lens is closer to the sensor. That's a tougher optical problem. Sony has dealt with it by adding microprisms to improve off angle performance to their e-mount sensors after the first generation. It helped a lot.
 

Turbofrog

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
Mar 21, 2014
Messages
5,362
Your suspicion is not true. I am one of the few people that have been foolish enough to try to adapt M43 lenses onto e-mount cameras. On a APS-C sized sensor, M43 lenses have a small image circle. About the same as what a c-mount lens covers. So for the most part, M43 lenses only have an image circle large enough to cover the sensor. There may be a few that have larger image circles but there is at least one M43 camera with a lens that does not even cover the entire sensor. If it exists, any corner performance advantage is more likely due to the fact the M43 has a relatively long registration distance compared to e-mount. Thus more rays are closer to perpendicular. E-mount has a much larger sensor yet the lens is closer to the sensor. That's a tougher optical problem. Sony has dealt with it by adding microprisms to improve off angle performance to their e-mount sensors after the first generation. It helped a lot.
I certainly understand the challenges associated with the sensor size and flange distance, but from the testing I had seen, it looked like several M4/3 lenses seemed to cover APS-C quite well, especially after distortion correction, with the exception of the inexpensive kit lenses. I imagine that the ultrawides would be a different story, since projecting a larger image circle is obviously a big deal for those FLs...
 

drd1135

Zen Snapshooter
Joined
Mar 17, 2011
Messages
6,188
Location
Southwest Virginia
Real Name
Steve
These are very personal decisions. To me, it either fits in a pocket (RX100) or it goes in a bag. Once it's in a bag the "size issue" favors how it feels in the hand. I like the EM5 ii and the Pen F but the EM1 felt too big and the GM1 felt too small. Lots of folks love the EM1, however, and they are right to do so if it works for them.
 
Last edited:

jimr.pdx

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Dec 5, 2010
Messages
514
Location
~1hr north of Portland OR
Real Name
Jim R
So the Hassel cannot hold its own thread, it needs to take over this one? Let me know when the med-format pancake primes arrive to justify the thin body, otherwise it's another great sensor wrapped around a body with too little grip to balance its lenses, whose size is dictated by getting light to the corner of a large sensor at a reasonably parallel angle. Several here are not concerned by that 'law' of optics, but most are. (oops, speedy's post/link covers all this stuff!)

Back to the Lumix line..
This model-killing thread prompted me to grab a used GM body. I had to get one soon, or forever wonder :cool:
 
Last edited:

drd1135

Zen Snapshooter
Joined
Mar 17, 2011
Messages
6,188
Location
Southwest Virginia
Real Name
Steve
So the Hassel cannot hold its own thread, it needs to take over this one? Let me know when the med-format pancake primes arrive to justify the thin body, otherwise it's another great sensor wrapped around a body with too little grip to balance its lenses, whose size is dictated by getting light to the corner of a large sensor at a reasonably parallel angle. Several here are not concerned by that 'law' of optics, but most are. (oops, speedy's post/link covers all this stuff!)

Back to the Lumix line..
This model-killing thread prompted me to grab a used GM body. I had to get one soon, or forever wonder :cool:
Of course, we haven't mentioned the price of the Hassy or it's lenses. Currently, this is more important to me than the size. I would like to win one, however.
 

lenshoarder

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Nov 7, 2010
Messages
1,324
I certainly understand the challenges associated with the sensor size and flange distance, but from the testing I had seen, it looked like several M4/3 lenses seemed to cover APS-C quite well, especially after distortion correction, with the exception of the inexpensive kit lenses. I imagine that the ultrawides would be a different story, since projecting a larger image circle is obviously a big deal for those FLs...
Unless I'm missing it, I don't see where in that article they show that several M43 lenses cover APS-C quite well. The one lens they used shows that it doesn't. That is about the same coverage as you would expect from some c-mount or 110 lenses. Native APS-C lenses have larger image circles. Well at least on Sony. Canon APS-C lenses can be another matter entirely.
 

lenshoarder

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Nov 7, 2010
Messages
1,324
These are very personal decisions. To me, it either fits in a pocket (RX100) or it goes in a bag. Once it's in a bag the "size issue" favors how it feels in the hand. I like the EM5 ii and the Pen F but the EM1 felt too big and the GM1 felt too samll. Lots of folks love the EM1, however, and they are right to do so if it works for them.
I feel the same, either it's pocketable or it's not. Once it's not, the size is not particularly important since I'll be carrying a bag around anyways. I tried the GM1 as a replacement for my RX100. For a variety of reasons, it just didn't work out as that. The big one was that it simply was not small enough to pocket. Having said that, I actually really do like the GM1. It's a marvel that they were able to fit a M43 sensor in a body the same size as a Pentax Q. I don't find it too fiddly due to size. I even tried it with a bodycap lens to make it more pocketable.
 

Turbofrog

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
Mar 21, 2014
Messages
5,362
Unless I'm missing it, I don't see where in that article they show that several M43 lenses cover APS-C quite well. The one lens they used shows that it doesn't. That is about the same coverage as you would expect from some c-mount or 110 lenses. Native APS-C lenses have larger image circles. Well at least on Sony. Canon APS-C lenses can be another matter entirely.
Hmm? Did you scroll down? The cheap 14-42 shown at the top doesn't cover APS-C (though certainly a large image circle than almost any C-mount lens), the 45mm/1.8 covers APS-C entirely, and the 20mm/1.7 covers APS-C when distortion corrections are applied.

Which lenses did you test on your Sony?
 
Last edited:
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
Copyright © 2009-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom