Personal View site logo
Panasonic G9, m43 4K monster with LCD on top
  • 273 Replies sorted by
  • The differences in image quality between the G9 and GH5 seem pretty small to me? Plus, note that the G9 was tested using the best u43 lens in existence: The Leica 42.5 Nocticron. The GH5 was tested using the Olympus 45/1.8. Yes, the Oly 45 is a great VALUE, but, it is nowhere near as good a lens as the Nocticron.

    G9_GH5_diff Lenses_used.jpg
    1178 x 657 - 612K
  • @jjj_ri_usa

    Testing methods of most sites unfortunately are very questionable.

  • @jjj_ri_usa I'm glad it wasn't just me who thought it wasn't wildly different.

    I'm surprised they used different lenses.. thats poor.

  • At F4 both lenses resolve below one blur unit. No biggie. At F5.6 the Olly is below one blur unit with near perfect edge to edge uniformity. An excellent choice for testing. You would only see the difference wide open.

  • We saw exactly the same thing when the G7 and GX85 came out. Lots of people kept thinking the "flagship" GH4 was better when it was totally obvious the newer sensors were better. We should be thankful that Panasonic didn't overly downgrade the newer cams to perpetuate the illusion. In fact, they didn't need to, they are happy to sell older tech for a higher price. Of course the newer sensors are better. Unless they aren't, like if it is a cheap cam with lower tech.

  • Hi Dr. Dave, I suppose that we could say that Nocticron and the Oly 45 are "the same" at f5.6, but...

    As far as center Sharpness the 45/1.8 is rated at 11 MP on the EM1 Mk2. The Nocticron is rated at 16 MP.

    When we look at the Field Maps, which shows the % of the Sharpness, Alas, DXO Mark did not test the Nocticron at any aperture except f1.2 for the "Field Mapping", so we could not do an apples to apples comparison at f5.6 in that plot.

    But, I did copy and paste the two simple sharpness vs aperture plots for each lens at 2/3 from the center. This is about the position of the DP review image I posted. It looks to me that the Nocticron holds its sharpness much better at 2/3 field? And of course the scale is the % of Center Sharpness and the Nocticron resolves much more than the Oly 45/1.8 to begin with so, it retains its sharpness better across the field and it is also a sharper lens to start with. Of course, these DXO tests are based on just one lens, so...

    See attached images for a couple comparisons.

    I suppose at f5.6 we could say "the lens doesn't matter anymore", but...I think it still has some impact? It would be great if DPReview would go back and shoot the GH5 and other u43 cameras with the Nocticron.

    856 x 557 - 149K
    1186 x 561 - 158K
    805 x 639 - 183K
  • @jjj_ri_usa I see a difference in the numbers you post, but I don't see a difference when I use the lenses. You can also post a chart from Imaging Resource at F5.6 and they will be the same, because the Nocticron is less sharp at F5.6 than F4. Using 5.6 evens out the differences.

    olly 56.jpg
    636 x 608 - 168K
  • sa902.jpg
    800 x 609 - 51K
  • New samples with the final production firmware, shot on a better lens at f/5,6 aperture:

    There's still room for a improvement with a really good lens like the Leica Nocticron at f/4 aperture but they are much better then the previous images.

  • I guess there's no real testing standards.....

  • @DrDave It think they must be sponsored to favor some cameras over the others (the larger formats over the smaller) cause I don't think they can be that incompetent, even after dozens of messages with clear explanation, clear comparisons etc, they still refuse to properly test m4/3 gear. :(

  • Adobe Camera RAW 10.1 and LR classic 7.1 that officially support the Panasonic G9 have been launched.

  • A RAW photo comparison about highlight DR at ISO 100 (with samples from Imaging Resource).

    ISO 100 DR.jpg
    1595 x 974 - 414K
  • @Eno Interesting from the point of view that ISO 100 is an extended ISO and the Fuji obviously has issue. That being said move to Base ISO 200 and they all are similar enough with the Fuji showing a little more shadow detail actually. I don't have Lightroom I used Capture One but it did show the same issue at the extended ISO 100.

    DR Test.jpg
    1418 x 1202 - 181K
  • @Scot I don't know about Capture One but with Adobe the G9 has definitely more highlight DR compared to the XT2. By the way, in your above example it's the GH5 vs XT 2 and not the G9.

    From what I see, ISO 100 on G9 is similar with ISO 200 on XT 2 and ISO 200 on G9 is unrivaled in highlight DR.

    XT2 vs G9 highlights DR.jpg
    1595 x 977 - 407K
  • @Eno Sorry slow to reply to your comment busy time of year. Capture One does not support G9 yet. That being said I used GH5 which is the same sensor and similar enough IMO. Lightroom does not handle the xtrans sensor well and is not suggested as a raw processor for Fuji raw. This may explain why we are seeing and showing 2 different things. In the end I'm afraid the m4/3 sensor is hitting a wall but Panasonic deserves Kudos for there processing advancements. Hopefully the organic sensor of the future will bring new possibilities and interestingly it's a team effort of Panasonic and FujiFilm. Don't get me wrong it's a great camera just maybe not the Hybrid for all of us. Here is another comparison.

    Panasonic Fuji Compare.jpg
    589 x 605 - 505K

    As I reported earlier, the G9 has a better DR compared to the Gh5 +it has less lens flares.