Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: New Panasonic GX7  (Read 17694 times)
Guillermo Luijk
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1303



WWW
« on: August 01, 2013, 10:25:52 AM »
ReplyReply


New 16Mpx sensor, 2,7Mpx tiltable EVF, body stabilisation, 1/8000, focus peaking, and beautiful...

Logged

Vladimirovich
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1320


« Reply #1 on: August 01, 2013, 10:54:10 AM »
ReplyReply

abomination... hopefully GH5 will not have any IBIS (as it is intended to be also a camera for videographers).
Logged
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5164


« Reply #2 on: August 01, 2013, 11:27:58 AM »
ReplyReply

It looks like a wonderful choice -- if the new Panasonic sensor performs well enough, this could lure me away from the E-M5, or at least entice me to add it to my kit, for those times when I would like to have two lenses ready for immediate use.

Vladimirovich: I would not worry about Panasonic _adding_ the _option_ of IBIS, which it clearly intends to increase the utility of non-OIS lenses (Olympus MFT, adaptor-mounted ones, and some from Panasonic itself), not to replace OIS.

P. S> The best preview I have seen so far is at Imaging Resource: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/panasonic-gx7/panasonic-gx7A.HTM One new feature that I have been asking for is the "pinpoint focusing mode", where the magnified view for manual focus occupies just part of the preview display, with the framing still visible around it.
« Last Edit: August 01, 2013, 11:34:54 AM by BJL » Logged
Remo Nonaz
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 262


WWW
« Reply #3 on: August 01, 2013, 12:30:06 PM »
ReplyReply

It looks to me like Panasonic has leap-frogged their own top-of-the-line camera, the GH3, in many ways. The GH3 is just becoming available in the US. Are they going to go to some newer version of the GH before the GH3 even gets off the ground and incorporate some of these features?
Logged

I really enjoy using old primes on my m4/3 camera. There's something about having to choose your aperture and actually focusing your camera that makes it so much more like... like... PHOTOGRAPHY!
Vladimirovich
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1320


« Reply #4 on: August 01, 2013, 12:58:40 PM »
ReplyReply

Vladimirovich: I would not worry about Panasonic _adding_ the _option_ of IBIS, which it clearly intends to increase the utility of non-OIS lenses (Olympus MFT, adaptor-mounted ones, and some from Panasonic itself), not to replace OIS.

thank you, but I prefer to avoid a shutter induced shock for a suspended sensor (@ certain shutter speeds), which IBIS simply can't handle as it is designed to counteract hands tremor...
Logged
Vladimirovich
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1320


« Reply #5 on: August 01, 2013, 01:02:58 PM »
ReplyReply

The GH3 is just becoming available in the US.

I purchased my GH3 w/o any issues from Adorama in Nov 2012... we are living in different US's apparently.

Quote
Subject: Your Adorama order (11622452) is on its way.
From: Adorama Customer Service (Adorama@e.adorama.com)
To: ... ;
Date: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 6:03 PM

So it is already a ~1 year old camera (will be 1 year by the time GX7 actually ships)
Logged
fike
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1373


Hiker Photographer


WWW
« Reply #6 on: August 01, 2013, 01:49:28 PM »
ReplyReply

this looks compelling. Some reviewers have commented that this is ideal for right-eyed people with big noses....keeps nose prints off the screen.  

I like the 10 second timer 3-shot mode. Looks great for bracketing. My E-M5 lacks this and it drives me nuts.

I like all the programmable buttons--all four of them.

I like the two wheels (dials, whatever).

built-in flashes suck, but they are useful to have in a pinch, so I like its inclusion.

Contoured grip looks good.  Appearance is attractive. It has a nice Leica 'L' too.  Yay! ;-)

I like the custom modes on the mode dial.  My E-M5 hides the custom settings in the most bizarrely arcane way.

The sample shots I saw looked promising, but only time will tell on IQ.  Unfortunately Panasonic hasn't really been a leader in sensors, so low-light and dynamic range may be the Achilles heal of a camera with excellent handling.  

Logged

Fike, Trailpixie, or Marc Shaffer
marcshaffer.net
TrailPixie.net

I carry an M43 ILC, a couple of good lenses, and a tripod.
Dale_Cotton2
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 94


WWW
« Reply #7 on: August 01, 2013, 06:41:25 PM »
ReplyReply

Fike wrote:
> The sample shots I saw looked promising, but only time will tell on IQ.  Unfortunately Panasonic hasn't really been a leader in sensors, so low-light and dynamic range may be the Achilles heal of a camera with excellent handling. 

Totally share your concern. Here's what we know about the new sensor from the Panasonic press release:

"Panasonic developed a new 16.00-megapixel Digital Live MOS Sensor for LUMIX GX7 that achieves both high resolution and high sensitivity image recording with minimum noise by utilizing cutting-edge Semiconductor Fine Technology to improve color saturation by approx. 10% and a redesigned on-chip lens that enhances light condensation to achieve approx. 10% higher sensitivity. Noise generation is minimized in both pixel circuit and digital signal readout circuit for better S/N ratio by approx. 25% and detail reproduction by approx.10% compared to the LUMIX DMC-GX1, making it possible to capture clear images even in low lit situations.  The image processor Venus Engine features advanced noise reduction systems, including Multi-process NR (Noise Reduction) and Detail Reproduction Filter Process, which enhances the limit resolution. The combination of the digital Live MOS Sensor and the Venus Engine achieves max. ISO 25,600."

Background to this: last time I paid any attention to Panasonic, sensor noise was still their Achille's heel, including a long tradition of really awful shadow-area banding. If we look at the DxO numbers on the GX1, which they're using as a point of comparison:

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Compare-Camera-Sensors/Compare-cameras-side-by-side/%28appareil1%29/842|0/%28brand%29/Panasonic/%28appareil2%29/816|0/%28brand2%29/Panasonic/%28appareil3%29/754|0/%28brand3%29/Panasonic#toggleBookmarks

We see that the GX1's DR and low-light are behind what other manufacturers are now doing. The GH3 has more reasonable numbers, but apparently that's because it's the only Panasonic micro-4/3 to use a non-Panasonic sensor (Sony). And the press release tells us the GX7 will be using a Panasonic sensor, not a third-party one. (I threw the GF6 into the comparison because it's the latest Panasonic reviewed by DxO with one of their own sensors.)

So -- question for those of you with the relevant technical competencies:

If we take their 10% this and 25% that and apply it to the GX1 scores, what theoretical improvement in scores would that result in? Given that a one-stop increase is a 100% increase, I'd guess we're talking at most a half-stop improvement, such as from DR 10.6 to DR 11.

I'm spoiled by having used a D7000 for the past two years and would find it hard to take a significant step backward in SNR-related IQ parameters. It seems there's roughly a one-stop hit just by dropping down from APS-C to 4/3 in sensor size, so any further IQ hit really hurts. But any camera that combines a smaller body size with an actual adult control interface plus a well-reputed lens line-up plus IS plus a built-in EVF is such a rare thing. So please tell me I'm all wet on this IQ thing. ;)
Logged
Paulo Bizarro
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1657


WWW
« Reply #8 on: August 02, 2013, 01:09:43 AM »
ReplyReply

This looks like a great little camera, a very good addition to this segment, and a straight shot at the EP5. One of the things I already like about it is that the price of the Fuji XE-1 decreased to the point that I bought one yesterday, the kit with the 18-55 lens. And they even included a free fuji leather half-case, nice.

Now, of course I not sure if Fuji reduced the prices due to the coming into the market of this camera, or even the EP5, but competition is good.
Logged

Vladimirovich
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1320


« Reply #9 on: August 02, 2013, 09:06:35 AM »
ReplyReply

It seems there's roughly a one-stop hit just by dropping down from APS-C to 4/3 in sensor size

it is less than 1 stop, even for 1.5x crop it is not 2 times bigger area, but just 1.7x times bigger...
Logged
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5164


« Reply #10 on: August 02, 2013, 11:05:01 AM »
ReplyReply

I'm spoiled by having used a D7000 for the past two years and would find it hard to take a significant step backward in SNR-related IQ parameters. It seems there's roughly a one-stop hit just by dropping down from APS-C to 4/3 in sensor size ...
Going by sensor area, and ignoring the likelihood that a smaller sensor with smaller pixels has somewhat less dark/read noise (measured in electrons), Four Thirds format should be about 2/3 stop slower that Nikon/Sony "DX" format and 1/2 stop slower than Canon's EF-S format. Of course, anytime lens or aperture choice is limited by weight or size or the desire for adequate DOF, the smaller format can end up using a lower f-stop, and thus a lower ISO speed to get the same shutter speed, reducing or eliminating the noise disadvantage when equal shutter speed is needed. The full noise/DR advantage is still present for the larger sensors when they can be used at base ISO speed.
Logged
Telecaster
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 882



« Reply #11 on: August 02, 2013, 02:03:43 PM »
ReplyReply

I tend to ignore lab numbers when it comes to judging image quality. I just look at photos, processed by me through my workflow and viewed via my prefered media (prints, calibrated display, iPad). If, for example, I can't see objectionable chroma noise at my max print size then AFAIC it doesn't exist. Of course this means that to properly judge IQ I have to use the camera, which takes time and $$. I've bought quite a bit of gear over the years that still sees serious use...just not by me.   Wink

I like the look of the GX7 and I like the specs. Hopefully I'll still like it after evaluation.

-Dave-
Logged
fike
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1373


Hiker Photographer


WWW
« Reply #12 on: August 02, 2013, 02:39:49 PM »
ReplyReply

I tend to ignore lab numbers when it comes to judging image quality. I just look at photos, processed by me through my workflow and viewed via my prefered media (prints, calibrated display, iPad). If, for example, I can't see objectionable chroma noise at my max print size then AFAIC it doesn't exist. Of course this means that to properly judge IQ I have to use the camera, which takes time and $$. I've bought quite a bit of gear over the years that still sees serious use...just not by me.   Wink

I like the look of the GX7 and I like the specs. Hopefully I'll still like it after evaluation.

-Dave-

I agree that lab numbers aren't much good.  What I do like are repeatable lab photos. If I compare benchmark test images from a new camera to one I already have and find the new one to be comparable or better, then I consider upgrading or buying it if it meets my other needs. 

A good example of this is the E-M5 and the 7D, both cameras I use.  When I was considering the diminutive E-M5 I evaluated its independent test images against the same 7D benchmark images on review sites, and I found the differences to be trivial--maybe slightly in favor of the E-M5.  If you look at the performance numbers, it looks like the 7D is a piece of crap (which it isn't).  If you look at images, that difference is quite subtle.  I now happily use both cameras.

Logged

Fike, Trailpixie, or Marc Shaffer
marcshaffer.net
TrailPixie.net

I carry an M43 ILC, a couple of good lenses, and a tripod.
Vladimirovich
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1320


« Reply #13 on: August 02, 2013, 03:40:26 PM »
ReplyReply

from Poland (use translate.google.com)

http://www.optyczne.pl/328.1-artyku%C5%82-Panasonic_Lumix_GX7_-_pierwsze_wra%C5%BCenia.html
Logged
Guillermo Luijk
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1303



WWW
« Reply #14 on: August 04, 2013, 05:21:19 AM »
ReplyReply

The full noise/DR advantage is still present for the larger sensors when they can be used at base ISO speed.

Even in that case, if the same DOF is desired at the same shutter speed, the larger sensor will need to be stopped down to a higher f-number, again reducing or eliminating the noise advantage through higher photon collection.

When there is a shutter speed constraint, the real noise advantage of large sensors only comes when there are no min. DOF constraints at all, and viceversa.

For me the choice of a large sensor vs a smaller one is justified in any of these situations:
- Shallow DOF is a priority
- No shutter speed constraints (e.g. tripod applications)
- No min. DOF constraints (e.g. low light applications at high ISO and max. lens aperture)
- 35mm lenses must be used (for any reason: you already have them, you need a specific lens with no equivalent in smaller systems,...)
Logged

Vladimirovich
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1320


« Reply #15 on: August 04, 2013, 10:43:06 AM »
ReplyReply

Even in that case, if the same DOF is desired at the same shutter speed
and more often it is not actually, but an artificial argument of small sensor camera owners (who always insist that only their DOF is the right one for a shot)...

Logged
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5164


« Reply #16 on: August 04, 2013, 12:04:10 PM »
ReplyReply

Even in that case, if the same DOF is desired at the same shutter speed, the larger sensor will need to be stopped down to a higher f-number ...
Agreed: I was referring to situations where it is acceptable to use the longer exposure time needed to get the same DOF at base ISO speed in the larger format, so making the need for a tripod, or good light, or artifical light more common in a larger format when wanting to use base ISO speed.

The irony is that this was well understood with film cameras, where as format size increased from 36x24mm to medium format to large format, the overall trend was towards greater usage of tripods and/or artifical lighting in order tp keep using the best, low ISO speed films. With digital, this trade-off for realizing the increased IQ potential of a larger format is often overlooked.
« Last Edit: August 04, 2013, 12:13:31 PM by BJL » Logged
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5164


« Reply #17 on: August 04, 2013, 12:12:28 PM »
ReplyReply

... small sensor camera owners (who always insist that only their DOF is the right one for a shot)...
What insulting nonsense: Guillermo just listed "shallow DOF is a priority" and "no min. DOF constraints" as amongst the situations where larger formats have an advantage, and at a guess, most or all small sensor camera owners in this forum agree. Please abstain from counter-factual straw-man stereotypes of people you disagree with, or whose camera choices differ from yours, and try instead to read and understand what they are actually saying before you reply.
Logged
Vladimirovich
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1320


« Reply #18 on: August 04, 2013, 12:55:59 PM »
ReplyReply

What insulting nonsense: Guillermo just listed "shallow DOF is a priority" and "no min. DOF constraints" as amongst the situations where larger formats have an advantage, and at a guess, most or all small sensor camera owners in this forum agree. Please abstain from counter-factual straw-man stereotypes of people you disagree with, or whose camera choices differ from yours, and try instead to read and understand what they are actually saying before you reply.
may be you need to take your regular medicine (whatever it is) first and reread my post... in most cases (not for a lab test where you intend to have the same DOF by design) owners of smaller format cameras insist on having the same DOF whereas in most cases it is not necessary and just suits them (or they just do not have an alternative of having it less)... for the record at this moment my camera is m43 one.
Logged
fike
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1373


Hiker Photographer


WWW
« Reply #19 on: August 04, 2013, 12:58:57 PM »
ReplyReply

NOOOOOOOOO........NOOOOOOTTTT the depth of field equivalence debate again. I gouge my eyes out!!! [sticking fingers in ears.] nananannanananananannanana. I can't year you people.  The GX7 looks like a lovely little camera doesn't it?
Logged

Fike, Trailpixie, or Marc Shaffer
marcshaffer.net
TrailPixie.net

I carry an M43 ILC, a couple of good lenses, and a tripod.
Pages: [1] 2 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad