1. Reminder: Please user our affiliate links to get to your favorite stores for holiday shopping!

Panasonic Micro Four Thirds Cameras

Discussion in 'Panasonic Cameras' started by photoheron, Jun 22, 2013.

  1. photoheron

    photoheron Mu-43 Regular

    30
    Jun 22, 2013
    Fort Smith Arkansas
    Brad
    My knowledge is limited, I want to learn more about the micro four third system from Panasonic. My last camera was a Nikon D40 DSLR. Currently using a point shoot. I want to get back into photography and read a review of the G6. It peaked my curiosity to learn more.

    What is the difference between the Panasonic cameras and conventional DSLR?
    Are you happy with image quality? The performance of your camera? Why do you switch from a DSLR?
     
  2. foxtail1

    foxtail1 Science geek & photo nut

    Dec 30, 2011
    Southwest Virginia
    Kristi
    For me, my Panasonic was an upgrade from a point and shoot. I considered DSLR, and decided that I didn't want the weight and size. I have a G3 and a G5, plus an assortment of Lumix lenses, and I've been quite happy with the system. No issues with image quality at all...but I'd like to think that's the photographer, not just the camera. :wink:

    If you want to see some images, you're welcome to check out my Flickr photostream (link below). Except for a couple of cell phone photos, everything there since December 2011 was shot with a Panasonic ยต43.
     
  3. DeoreDX

    DeoreDX Mu-43 Veteran

    208
    Mar 13, 2013
    Alabama
    Having owned Nikon SLRs since the D50 in 2005 I am very familiar with the performance of their cameras. The G5 will actually be a step up from the D40 in performance. It is faster (AF and shot to shot), better high iso performance, more resolution, etc. Now those old 6mp Nikon ccd sensors were incredibly sharp at the pixel level and going to a CMOS if you pixel peep each individual pixel will seem softer but if you look at the image as a whole with the much higher resolution there will be a lot more detail. If you liked the size and shape of the D40 I think you will be really comfortable with the G5. It is slightly smaller but offers a very similar grip and feel.
     
  4. MingTyhMaa

    MingTyhMaa Mu-43 Regular

    80
    Jul 20, 2012
    Lafayette, CA
    Ming-Tyh Maa
    From what I've read, one thing to keep in mind is that with technology advancing so fast, modern tech vastly outperforms older tech after maybe 3+ years or so, regardless of sensor size. High ISO performance improves every year. The autofocus systems of mirrorless cameras are quite good, and many believe to be noninferior to dSLRs. And if there is disagreement regarding the autofocus speed, it will certainly equalize shortly.

    I think the advantage of mirrorless is that the longer focal lengths lenses are not prohibitively large, transitioning from video to still photographs is faster, and of course the obvious, which is that the total cumulative size is smaller. Another advantage is that older camera bodies take a much larger percentage drop in price in comparison to dSLRs. For example, though the G6 is brand spanking new, the G5 can be had for $320-350. The GH2 can be had for $500-550. To me, those prices are amazing.

    I switched from dSLR because I wanted to take a camera with me all the time, and it was hard to lug around a 5D Mark II with 2 lenses, along with a diaper bag. Once you downsize your gear, your tripod gets smaller too which is nice. My opinion is unless you make money from photography, mirrorless represents a more than adequate compromise. Even some pros are turning to mirrorless.
     
  5. MikeR_GF1

    MikeR_GF1 Mu-43 Veteran

    My rationale as well, except for the diaper bag. :smile:
     
  6. photoheron

    photoheron Mu-43 Regular

    30
    Jun 22, 2013
    Fort Smith Arkansas
    Brad
    From reading the comments in thread and other posts I have concluded the following;
    Good price point.
    Less bulky to carry around and less weight too.
    Great image quality.
    Host of features that rival more expensive cameras.

    Thanks for the help.
    I think that a Panny Micro 4/3 is in my future.
     
  7. demiro

    demiro Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Nov 7, 2010
    photoheron, the only contrary point I'd make relates to what you shoot. If you plan to shoot fast action sports, birds in flight, etc. then I don't think any m4/3s camera is the right tool for the job. DSLRs will generally do a better job.

    Other than that, I agree with what others have said. Hard to beat the overall proposition that m4/3s offers: value; size; image quality.
     
  8. YZYgold

    YZYgold Mu-43 Regular

    27
    Apr 19, 2013
    Australia
    I agree, the m4/3's don't work as well on moving objects. But still possible with more hit and miss shots
     
  9. entropicremnants

    entropicremnants Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jul 16, 2012
    John Griggs
    I gave up a pair of Nikon DSLR's first for some Olympus stuff, but moved to Panasonic bodies because for me the handling is better. I wrote several blog posts covering why I gave up DSLR's and embraced micro four thirds.

    Senility or Madness: Giving Up DSLR's for Micro Four Thirds

    I ended up with the E-M5 which is technically a great camera and perfect for some -- but I gave it up for my own reasons with regard to handling and some of the purple blob issues.

    No Regrets: Living Small in a Big Camera World - My Olympus E-M5 Review

    I ended up with a G5, a GX1 and a GH1 for video. I really do like the Panasonic cameras better even though in some specification areas they might seem to be "inferior" to the E-M5, for my photography they still work very well.

    Here's my G5 review and I'd bet the G6 is even better:

    Diversity's Real Value: A Panasonic Lumix DMC-G5 Camera Review

    If you're a sports shooter, go DSLR for now. Future generations of mirrorless will perfect phase detect autofocus on sensor, but they are not there now although the Nikon 1 system is very good at that.
     
  10. fsuscotphoto

    fsuscotphoto Mu-43 Top Veteran

    819
    Feb 15, 2013
    St. Cloud, FL
    Ron
    I still don't understand the rush to give up the DSLR. It's called the right tool for the job. I just got my OMD a couple of months ago and I'm not about to give up my 7D. You don't sell all your screw drivers just because you bought a new electric drill! How many of you still have and use film occasionally? Why not get rid of that camera as well?

    Keep what gives you pleasure and that you can afford. Everyone's argument reminds me of when I bought a second car. My dad asked me why I needed two since I couldn't drive but one at a time. My answer: because I wanted it!


    Sent from my iPad using Mu-43 mobile app
     
  11. entropicremnants

    entropicremnants Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jul 16, 2012
    John Griggs
    Agreed. For me, micro four thirds IS the right tool. It also involves what you can keep in your toolbox. It makes no sense generally to have a complete set of Snap-On and Matco tools -- you generally choose one or the other.

    The parallel in system changing is lenses. If you just shoot kit lenses or whatever then why bother? But if you have an entire lens "ecosystem" unless you are very well heeled maintaining the same capability in both systems is very, very expensive. In addition, if you split that capability you have to bring both systems to be sure you're ready for anything!

    That's what drives many of us to give up our DLSR's. It gives us one system for everything we choose to do. We get the benefit of image quality so close it's a trivial issue, and the ability to carry a very capable kit in a small bag.

    For instance, in my Think Tank Retrospective 5 I have a G5, 12-35 and 35-100 f/2.8 zooms, a 7-14mm, 17mm f/1.8 and 25mm f/1.4. Even filters, extra batteries and so forth. Pretty much I'm ready for anything with a small, attractive, rugged bag.

    So if you don't need DSLR's it's silly to keep them and quite expensive.

    But my caveat from my last post still applies: if you shoot sports or things that move like sports DSLR's are still the game. But for virtually anything else you can use micro four thirds. Period. :biggrin:
     
  12. fsuscotphoto

    fsuscotphoto Mu-43 Top Veteran

    819
    Feb 15, 2013
    St. Cloud, FL
    Ron
    I agree with that reasoning as well. I am leery about giving up my DSLR until I can get a couple of more lenses for my OMD and until I can do air shows without a hitch. Maybe the next generation OMD will doves those problems and I'll be right there with you!


    Sent from my iPad using Mu-43 mobile app
     
  13. dougjgreen

    dougjgreen Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 5, 2013
    San Diego
    Doug Green
    If I could get more than a few bucks for them, I would. I have a bunch of Medium format film gear, as well as 35mm SLRs. The 35mm stuff is worth less than the cost to ship it, and the medium format stuff is worth about 5 cents on the dollar compared to what it cost when new (fortunately, I never bought any of this stuff new).
     
  14. profgregorio

    profgregorio Mu-43 Regular

    116
    May 21, 2013
    Manila, Philippines
    I also had a Minolta SLR with three lenses which I was originally planning to sell, if I could only get some decent money for them. Fortunately, I managed to buy an adapter so that I am now able to use all three lenses on my G3. I now enjoy using the manual lenses a lot because it gives me a sense of old-school photographer feel because of the use of the lens aperture ring and manual focus. In addition, the lenses render a soft, vintage, film-like look to the photos.
     
  15. photoheron

    photoheron Mu-43 Regular

    30
    Jun 22, 2013
    Fort Smith Arkansas
    Brad
    I'm currently using a point and shoot, I have no investment in DSLR equipment. Im starting from scratch. I have used a DSLR, flim cameras and point and shoot over the years. I love photography. I like having a camera handy.

    I'm not into sports action photography that is not an issue. Curious why action shots are difficult?
     
  16. dougjgreen

    dougjgreen Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 5, 2013
    San Diego
    Doug Green
    Micro 4/3 cameras use a different autofocus technology than DSLRs, which is based upon the boundaries between edges of high contrast, it's highly accurate, but not quite as fast as the mechanism that DSLRs use.
     
  17. entropicremnants

    entropicremnants Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jul 16, 2012
    John Griggs
    3-D focus is not efficient on most mirrorless systems. Phase detect autofocus like DSLR's have not only knows whether you're in focus, but in WHICH DIRECTION you are out of focus. Hence it doesn't have to "hunt" for focus by reversing the motor after making a wrong guess like mirrorless systems often do.

    Which means movement tracking isn't great. When something goes out of focus, the camera has to guess which way to go to track it.

    The Nikon 1 system does have phase detect and contrast detect autofocus both for instance. It can tell which way to go using phase detect, and then totally nail the sharpness using contrast detect -- the best of both worlds.

    Someday all mirrorless systems will like be this way, but not yet.
     
  18. deejayvee

    deejayvee Mu-43 Regular

    71
    Feb 3, 2013
    Sydney, Australia
    David
    One thing to note is that the points you mention also apply to the Olympus M4/3 cameras.

    Both of my M4/3 cameras have been Panasonics, so I can recommend them from experience. But one of the benefits of the M4/3 format is that there is more than 1 manufacturer. Choice = good! :smile: