Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Pany GX7 sensor cleaning  (Read 1299 times)
stever
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1065


« on: December 02, 2013, 10:26:48 PM »
ReplyReply

there's been some discussion of manufacturers' direction not to wet-clean stabilized sensors.  given my experience with Canon DSLRs (which have reduced excess manufacturing oil/gunk over the years and improved ultrasonic cleaning) it's inconceivable to me that mirrorless cameras won't need an occasional wet cleaning.

I'm seriously considering a GX7, but paying to send it back to Panasonic for cleaning (for who knows how long) is a serious negative.

recalling when all manufacturers said DSLRs needed to be returned for cleaning (which was BS), does anyone have practical experience cleaning stabilized sensors?  what would be the symptoms of damage to the stabilizer from cleaning?


Logged
PhotoEcosse
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 624



« Reply #1 on: December 03, 2013, 03:46:41 AM »
ReplyReply

Interesting question. I had not appreciated that there was a potential problem.

Answer anyone?
Logged

************************************
"Reality is an illusion caused by lack of alcohol."
Alternatively, "Life begins at the far end of your comfort zone."
Telecaster
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 835



« Reply #2 on: December 03, 2013, 02:08:41 PM »
ReplyReply

I've wet- and brush-cleaned the sensor in my Olympus E-M5 without incident. This was after loaning it to a friend who didn't get that you're not supposed to leave a camera with an exposed sensor face up on a table for an entire afternoon.   Shocked  In normal use, with frequent lens changes, I've never needed to do any cleaning. Same goes for my GX7, which I've had for a few months now.

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

Posts: 1065


« Reply #3 on: December 04, 2013, 10:11:35 PM »
ReplyReply

thanks Telecaster, I've searched reasonably extensively and no one who has wet cleaned the sensor has had a problem (that they are aware of) - so I've ordered a GX7.

I've been researching and agonizing over whether a small mirrorless camera can give acceptable (equal to a Canon apsc) IQ as an alternative to the 5D3 when convenient and inconspicuous carry is a priority. 

how do you compare the GX7 and E-M5? I recently printed a couple 13x19s from my son's E-M5, one was sharp, but one wasn't - quite - for reasons that weren't obvious from the metadata and I'm assuming some sort of pilot error
Logged
Telecaster
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 835



« Reply #4 on: December 05, 2013, 01:53:32 PM »
ReplyReply

I haven't directly compared the E-M5 (or E-M1) and GX7 in terms of printed output. I have made 15x20" prints from each but not of the same subject matter. My not in-depth take is that the cameras are pretty much interchangeable in terms of image quality. The E-M5 RAWs are more intensely USM'd out-of-camera than the others and thus look sharper initially...but actual detail rendition is no greater. The GX7 may have an edge in dynamic range...you can massage even the JPEGs to the point of looking unnatural. I like the GX7 a lot too for its rangefinder-style handling and straightforward menu system.

I've attached an example GX7 pic, taken with an 18mm f/4 Zeiss lens via a Metabones SpeedBooster for a combined 12.75mm f/2.8. This is the first (non-deleted) pic I took using the SB. It's a 30 second exposure at ISO 200, probably f/5.6, taken about 25 minutes after sunset. I used the JPEG via my iPad...boosted highlights a little via Levels and contrast with an S-curve to keep the pic from looking HDR-ish. There's a bit of green CA here & there from the lens if you look closely...easily fixed if I were to process the RAW for printing.

-Dave-
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad