Personal View site logo
Make sure to join PV on Telegram or Facebook! Perfect to keep up with community on your smartphone.
Please, support PV!
It allows to keep PV going, with more focus towards AI, but keeping be one of the few truly independent places.
Panasonic GX80, GX85, or even GX7 Mark II in Japan
  • 417 Replies sorted by
  • markr041markr041

    This makes use of many of the features of the GX85 - inconspicuousness, handheld stability, small and fast lenses, low light prowess, fast focus, dof tricks, touch-screen focus pull, in-camera audio, in-camera color grading:

    Lumix 25mm f1.7 and 12-23mm lenses.

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    image

    http://photodanielm.blogspot.ru/2016/07/the-panasonic-lumix-gx85-gx80-japan-gx7.html

    img963.jpg
    800 x 539 - 138K
  • markr041markr041

    Yup. I found an old Olympus Zuiko 9-18mm zoom - unstabilized - that now can be employed (with adaptor) for handheld 4K video, using the unique perspective of an ultra wide-angle lens. This lens was the lightest and smallest ultrawide zoom 43 lens made by Olympus, and it is indeed small, not having to have OIS and not being very fast. The autofocus sounds like gears being mashed on an 18-wheeler, but it does the job to attain focus. I just never let it move during a shot.

  • DrDaveDrDave

    Bolt on Minolta 50mm. Camera says: Change aperture? I hit the 50mm button. Double tap on the image to get focus magnification. Then shoot handheld with IS on my lens from 1979. So, I know that Olympus pioneered this tech, and Panasonic is late to the game, but this is pretty good tech. It's worth remembering that the reason I tried m43 in the first place was to use my old lenses.
    http://www.personal-view.com/talks/uploads/FileUpload/26/d38b7016df3437b42f75f1aca3ca00.jpg

  • markr041markr041

    Not handheld.

  • markr041markr041

    12-32mm + 45-150mm Lumix lenses + ND.

  • MarcioKMarcioK

    Since DxO stated in their GX7 analysis that with the Oly 75mm the GX7 was LESS sharp than a E-P1 (yeah, the one with the 12mp sensor), I've taking their reports with huge reservations.

    (I have both cameras and the GX7 is way sharper)

  • 4CardsMan4CardsMan

    Some aspects of quality, image or otherwise, cannot be captured by numbers.

  • DrDaveDrDave

    Ha ha The GH4 has a better score but the stills and video look better on the GX85.
    Is it not humorous?

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    image

    Panasonic sensor progress almost stopped.

    http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Panasonic-Lumix-GX80-GX85-sensor-review-Diminutive-design

    img903.jpg
    800 x 276 - 39K
  • thetricksterthetrickster

    I ran the GH4 clip (above) through NeatVideo and even still, I think the GX80 clip looks (a lot) better!

  • markr041markr041

    @Vesku We know two things are different in the GX85 relevant to IQ:

    1. There is no anti-aliasing filter, which should increase resolution for the same sensor and processing (if they are the same) and
    2. improved processing has reduced moire that would otherwise increase as a result of the lack of an anti-aliasing filter. The processor chip is I think new, along with algorithms.
  • MarcioKMarcioK

    I guess the sensor is kind of new, albeit being 16mp. When the new 20mp Sony m4/3 sensor was first listed (IMX269), another 16mp sensor was also listed too (IMX159) - I guess that it is the GX85 sensor.

    Don't know if this sensor was previously used in another camera, but for sure it is not the E-M5 mark I sensor (IMX109); don't know if there was some intermediate sensor numbers between these two.

  • VeskuVesku

    I wonder how much the GX85 better high iso is the result of better in-camera processing and how much sensor itself. Can the GH4 4k video be as good when post processed heavily?

    Is GX85 RAW photos better in high iso than GH4 RAW photos?

    Rumors say the GH5 trusts heavy processing and not so superior sensor.

  • markr041markr041

    There also appears to be more detail in the GX85 crop compared to the GH4, despite the cropping.

  • thetricksterthetrickster

    Very impressed with the noise compared to the GH4, even cropping the the frame to match the GH4, the noise is much controlled.

    compare.png.jpg
    3840 x 2160 - 1M
  • Angry_CAngry_C

    Less noise in video but much more noise in audio:-)

  • DrDaveDrDave

    My experience is the same--less crop, less noise, slightly more detail (slight). There may be more NR going on, but the grain of the noise is more even.

  • markr041markr041

    Yes, the crop factor is less in the GX85 in 4K. I think it is one of the reasons one can use EIS in 4K on the GX85 - there are extra pixels.

    I agree that the GX85 clips have a different color look; more contrast and saturation in Standard, maybe a different calibration, but possibly also because of the crop there are less white reflectors in the more cropped (GH4) frame so average luminence is the same but the colored objects are more exposed. Certainly much less noise from the GX85.

  • MarcioKMarcioK

    @mark041 The crop factor is different in the GX85? And the GX85 samples looks like a little bit less exposed (albeit you've said that the histograms were equal - different calibration?)

    But yes, much less noise in the GX85.

  • markr041markr041

    GX85 versus the GH4 in low light - ISO 6400:

    Exact same lighting and camera position, tungsten lighting source, AWB, f1.8, 1/60th, ISO 6400, Standard Profile, NR -2. Exposure using the Histogram in each camera was set to be equal by adjusting the light source (in fact, not different across cameras).

    The GH4 is first in each sequence (you can see the change in crop).

    No recompression - the 4K files uploaded underwent no adjustment in post, not even recompression. These are the files right out of the camera, just merged losslessly.

    Technology advances.

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    @DrDave

    Camera must not have both mic and phones jacks, but must have two full size locking USB 3.0 ports located on small addon inserted in flash mount, and support for standard audio devices (both phones and mikes).

  • DrDaveDrDave

    I can sort of see the mic two ways. On the one hand, a lot of ppl record parallel audio, and even with a mic jack the audio would be low end. On the other hand, the electrical components needed for a basic audio jack are probably just a few dollars as the parts are used in everything from cell phones to refrigerators.

    The sad truth is that if the cam had real USB power and a mic jack/16 bit pcm, it would be a freaking legend.

  • Angry_CAngry_C

    @tonalt:

    the microphone is the worst I ever had in a photocamera. It records the IBIS noise on a very high level. That´s why panasonic cuts some frequencies so the sound is very thin. That is crap panasonic.

  • DrDaveDrDave

    Looking over the samples of video, I would say that although there are tiny, tiny differences among the G7, GX85 and GH4, these aren't big differences. Anyone who wants to get into 4K video will have a great time with these cams, and the unlocked "G7 PV" is the best deal. If you need IS, there is the GX85 for just a few dollars more, and the price is going to come down, one would hope.
    I think the real sleeper here IQ wise is the Sony A6300. This cam just pulls a bit more detail out of everything, and the difference is more noticeable than say the difference between a G7 and an NX500--the Samsung is very good, but not as good as the Sony, although, again, compared to what we had a few years ago this is a luxury of choices. Priced at a grand, the A6300 is a realistic alternative if you can deal with the annoying heat problems; lots of cams now for the budget film maker. Also it will be very interesting to see if the much delayed GH5 can outresolve the A6300--I would not bet on it.

Add a Comment