Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Down

Author Topic: Best M4/3 predominantly for stills  (Read 17082 times)

bluekorn

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 141
Re: Best M4/3 predominantly for stills
« Reply #20 on: June 03, 2014, 04:15:32 pm »

Hi All,

I had been wondering why the GX7 was pretty much ignored in this inquiry for a stills camera. Today the original poster asked about it. Would the GX7 be inferior in some way to the GH's and the OM5?

Bluekorn
Logged

GLJ

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 60
Re: Best M4/3 predominantly for stills
« Reply #21 on: June 03, 2014, 05:29:13 pm »

Some useful information - thanks. Of course I forgot about GX7 - that's got a lot going for it. Couple of other considerations are that I once had an Olympus 8080; if their menus haven't progressed a lot since then that would definitely put me off. And yes the zooms put a ceiling on ultimate performance so perhaps my most important requirement is to keep the feature set of the GH2 with better noise performance. Thinking about it, the format change is something I use a lot; obviously you can crop later but then you lose a bit of sensor area. So maybe I should stick with the GH2 and concentrate on optimal techniques for noise reduction because "jack of all trades" to me includes low light use (of course indoors the GH2/20mm is a nice discrete combination).

Its a tough one.
I'm lucky as I have a number of MFT cameras, so I tend to pick the one best for a particular job. I often do paid work which requires a totally silent camera in often low light, I used a G5 for a while to do this (which is pretty much the same sensor as the GH2) but now I have the GH3, this tends to get used just because it gives a little bit of extra headroom at the high ISOs. I say little because I tend to limit myself to ISO1600 with either camera. I suspect if I needed to go to 3200 or 6400, then a GH3/EM5 type would indeed start to be far preferable and it wouldn't then be a 'little bit' extra.

However for landscape work at base ISO, well .... really ..... while the newer sensors might indeed have cleaner shadows, what I find is that if you're pulling the files THAT much so that you start to notice the difference between a GH2 and a GH3, to be honest, other aspects of the image start going to $hit anyway, and if I knew that I needed to do some severe PP work on the final file, I'll probably have done a 5 stage bracket anyway, and then any difference disappears.

Worth mentioning that in the UK anyway at the moment, Panasonic are doing some really interesting deals, where you buy a GH3 body, then they give you a grip, battery, and a 25/1.4 pannyleica lens free. If you wanted those things in the first place, the body is almost free!
I don't see the GH3 as being particularly big myself, as I tend to have a lot of lenses, so then the system size as a whole is dictated by these, not the body.
If you haven't tried a GH3 in person though, I recommend you do first if you were considering one, as many people (myself included) consider the viewfinder to be really dreadful. Awful colour reproduction (greens especially) and blurry edges if you move your eye at all from dead centre. Different people seem to be affected different amounts by this. Some claim they can't see anything wrong. Drives me insane. Doesn't affect the final pictures of course  ;D

I have been on the fence about buying a GX7 to replace my EM5 for a while. Still might do it as there is lots about the Oly that bugs the hell out of me, and the shutter shake is often a huge issue, but the IBIS is excellent and it often lets me take excellent pictures hand held with some older 4/3 lenses I have. However I tested the GX7 IBIS as well and while I didn't like the fact that it doesn't stabilise the viewfinder when you half press the shutter, the actual stabilisation itself worked far better than I'd expected. If small and better high ISO is something you're after, I would look at the GX7 seriously.
Logged

Telecaster

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3686
Re: Best M4/3 predominantly for stills
« Reply #22 on: June 03, 2014, 05:58:35 pm »

but then wasn't there some banding (EMI) issues w/ Olympus cameras and P20/1.7 @ high gains (high ISOs)?

Yes, this is something I've seen first-hand. I use the 20mm with my GX7...IMO they make a great combo.

As for the GX7 in general: it can be unwieldy with larger lenses so in addition to the 20mm I stick with small ones like the Olympus 12 & 45mms, or the Panasonic 14–45mm when appropriate. For deep DOF pic taking the 14–45 is excellent, by far the best "kit" lens I've ever owned. Overall I prefer RF-like cameras, with the (E)VF placement at top left, so the GX7 is right in my wheelhouse. The menu system is straightforward, though the camera isn't as micro-configurable as the E-M1/5. The only non-optimal thing about it is the top right button & dial placement. I have to always be on guard not to push or turn something by accident with my thumb. Otherwise in most respects it's my favorite of the m43 cameras I've owned.

-Dave-
Logged

stever

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1250
Re: Best M4/3 predominantly for stills
« Reply #23 on: June 03, 2014, 10:57:49 pm »

although I like the GX7 (&20mm) I don't think you can expect more than 1 stop from the stabilization.

although I think the GX7 grip (and shutter release placement) could easily have been improved, I'm satisfied with the handling with the 35-100 -- but a real grip like the OMD 1 will be better.
Logged

stamper

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5882
Re: Best M4/3 predominantly for stills
« Reply #24 on: June 04, 2014, 05:09:27 am »

Hi All,

I had been wondering why the GX7 was pretty much ignored in this inquiry for a stills camera. Today the original poster asked about it. Would the GX7 be inferior in some way to the GH's and the OM5?

Bluekorn

I have been using the GX7 for a couple of months. Really impressed but I don't have anything else to compare it with. I have tried SLR lenses on it and the smaller ones work well in manual mode but not a 80-200 Nikon lens because you can't hold it firmly and manual focus at the same time. In general the handling is first rate. When comparing these systems then money must come into the equation. The GX7 seems - in the UK - to be in the middle purchasing bracket but the value must be nearer the top?

Arlen

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1707
Re: Best M4/3 predominantly for stills
« Reply #25 on: June 04, 2014, 12:22:13 pm »

I went from the Panasonic GH2 (owned it 3 years) to the Oly EM-1 last November. I rarely do video, but for still shooting it was definitely a worthwhile upgrade for me. Modest improvement in image quality, but the biggest factor for me is that the electronic viewfinder in the E-M1 is miles ahead of the one in the GH2, coming as close as I've seen to an optical viewfinder. Brightly lit areas don't get washed out, and when set up correctly, the overall brightness of the image in the viewfinder pretty closely matches the captured image. And the live-view histogram is accurate! Something that the GH2 just rarely got right.

"Feel" is a subjective thing, but to me the E-M1 is a joy to use, whereas I always felt like I was fighting with the GH2. Maybe the GH3 and/or GH4 compare favorably, but I haven't handled those so can't speak to their pros and cons.
Logged

tnargs

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 94
  • Just testing, very testing
GH4
« Reply #26 on: July 17, 2014, 12:55:22 am »

GH4 is currently the best µ4/3 body for stills. It is also beautifully matched to your lenses.

The E-M1 is, by comparison, now a niche camera for people specifically wedded to legacy or non-IS primes and who also spend most of their time in gloomy conditions with no tripod and a love of photos taken with such slow shutter speeds that any gesturing, walking or even blinking people or moving subject matter (even leaves!) are rendered as 'special effects'.

Comments above do not take price into account. The E-M1 on sale is currently a better value proposition, no doubt.

Comments above do not take size or weight into account. The GX7 is currently the pick of the rangefinder-style brigade, and the E-M10 or used E-M5 are best overall value, edging the G6 out only because it is a notch behind (one generation) in several areas, but still a very fine camera. It just seems to offer little or no advance from your excellent GH2.
Logged
“Symbolism exists to adorn and enrich, n

stamper

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5882
Re: Best M4/3 predominantly for stills
« Reply #27 on: July 17, 2014, 03:49:25 am »

Since my last post I have bought a Tamron 14-150 lens specifically made for Four Thirds. It came onto the market a couple of weeks ago. IMO a very good lens that works well with the GX7.

ripgriffith

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 373
    • ripsart.com
Re: Best M4/3 predominantly for stills
« Reply #28 on: July 17, 2014, 04:02:18 am »

true - but it seems OP wants some grip...

GH4 has the same sensor as E-M1... GH4 being a more video oriented camera has AA filter, E-M1 does not... GH4 has DFD focusing technology to increase CDAF speed, E-M1 has PDAF on sensor... IMHO GH4 has only the following advantages : much better video camera, DFD (w/ Panasonic m43 lenses so far), electronic rolling shutter for stills (but that means 10bit raw) and probably bigger grip for bigger hands... the rest goes towards E-M1
In other words, after filtering out all the irrelevant English: OP GH4 E-M1 GH4 AA E-M1 GH4 DFD CDAF E-M1 PDAF IMHO GH4 DFD  m43 E-M1.  ;D
Logged

Vladimirovich

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1311
Re: GH4
« Reply #29 on: July 17, 2014, 09:42:13 am »

GH4 is currently the best µ4/3 body for stills.

well, just one thing: E-M1 has EFCS, GH4 does not... that along with no AA for E-M1 and sufficiently strong AA for GH4 (video!) means that GH4 is robbed of noticeable resolution
Logged

PeterAit

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4559
    • Peter Aitken Photographs
Re: Best M4/3 predominantly for stills
« Reply #30 on: July 17, 2014, 10:46:30 am »

I am coming late to this thread, but I am growing extremely fond of the E-M1, which I have had for about a month. Part of this is due to the truly excellent Olympus 4/3 lenses that can be used with an adapter. Michael has written about this camera and the lenses on this site and I think that his high praise is spot-on.
Logged

BobDavid

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3307
Re: Best M4/3 predominantly for stills
« Reply #31 on: July 19, 2014, 12:17:13 am »

I'm a big fan of the Oly EM-1 and the EPL-5 with the VF-4. I only uss Zuiko fast primes. The image quality is excellent. The built-in IS on the EM-1 is
excellent. Pixel for pixel, the EM-1 is about as good as it gets. I am disappointed with the video quality--which is really too bad being that the IS is so damn good. If I were into shooting video, I'd opt for a Panasonic, no question.
Logged

tnargs

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 94
  • Just testing, very testing
Re: GH4
« Reply #32 on: September 08, 2014, 08:37:18 pm »

well, just one thing: E-M1 has EFCS, GH4 does not...
You really are scratching the bottom of the barrel to mention a firmware fix for an E-M1 design fault as a 'special feature'. And remember, the GH4 has true silent shutter mode, an actually genuinely useful feature as opposed to a fix for a flaw. I am most reluctant to ever again own a camera without a silent shutter mode. So useful once you have experienced it.
Quote
that along with no AA for E-M1 and sufficiently strong AA for GH4 (video!) means that GH4 is robbed of noticeable resolution
Actual close examination of test photos shows nothing 'noticeable'. It's a marketing gimmick, based on a technical reality that amounts to nothing in practice. Don't fall for tricky techie talk.
« Last Edit: April 15, 2015, 08:35:32 pm by tnargs »
Logged
“Symbolism exists to adorn and enrich, n

powerslave12r

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 135
    • Flickr
Re: Best M4/3 predominantly for stills
« Reply #33 on: September 08, 2014, 08:52:44 pm »

You folks seem like a knowledgeable bunch. Can someone correct my assessment? Solely based on the comparison tool on dpreview.com, the GX7 consistently loses out to the E-M5 in detail resolution. I was going gaga over the GX7 ever since it came out, but the dpreview test put me off it.

Does it have to do the lens they used on that review? Is it generally accepted that E-M5 resolves more than the GX7?

Thanks.
Logged
http://www.flickr.com/garagenoise
DP2M | X-M1 | 6D | TS-E24IIL | EF24-105L

Telecaster

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3686
Re: Best M4/3 predominantly for stills
« Reply #34 on: September 09, 2014, 01:02:45 am »

I have no clue re. dpreview's testing procedures. But I own an E-M5, E-M1 & GX7. Resolution amongst the three is essentially identical.

Re. "shutter shock": mechanical shutters vibrate at resonant frequencies. The E-M1's EFCS simply implements a feature the sensor already supported. It works. What's to complain about? BTW, silent shutter is nice too.

-Dave-
Logged

Jim Pascoe

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1131
    • http://www.jimpascoe.co.uk
Re: Best M4/3 predominantly for stills
« Reply #35 on: September 09, 2014, 06:34:05 am »

You folks seem like a knowledgeable bunch. Can someone correct my assessment? Solely based on the comparison tool on dpreview.com, the GX7 consistently loses out to the E-M5 in detail resolution. I was going gaga over the GX7 ever since it came out, but the dpreview test put me off it.

Does it have to do the lens they used on that review? Is it generally accepted that E-M5 resolves more than the GX7?

Thanks.

I think it would be mad to choose among these cameras based on image quality test reviews.  Try them in your hand, take some pictures, then decide on which you can live with.  They all produce excellent quality pictures.

Jim
Logged

Pope

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 28
Re: Best M4/3 predominantly for stills
« Reply #36 on: September 09, 2014, 06:42:58 am »

In my opinion the Oly's OMD's and the PEN E-P5, on the Panasonic side the GX7 and GH4 are up there with the. Oly's.
Logged

powerslave12r

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 135
    • Flickr
Re: Best M4/3 predominantly for stills
« Reply #37 on: September 09, 2014, 07:38:04 am »

Thanks for the inputs.
Logged
http://www.flickr.com/garagenoise
DP2M | X-M1 | 6D | TS-E24IIL | EF24-105L

donbga

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 454
Re: GH4
« Reply #38 on: September 09, 2014, 12:45:38 pm »


The E-M1 is, by comparison, now a niche camera for people specifically wedded to legacy or non-IS primes and who also spend most of their time in gloomy conditions with no tripod and a love of photos taken with such slow shutter speeds that any gesturing, walking or even blinking people or moving subject matter (even leaves!) are rendered as 'special effects'.

Nothing could be further from the truth, IMO. Your comment is totally specious, based on my encounters with local E-M1 owners. Granted there are those that get a woodie about using legacy adapted lenses but that cuts across all m4/3s bodies and models. Nothing wrong with that approach really but your comment isn't intellectually honest, but hey you are entitled to it! :)


Quote
Comments above do not take size or weight into account. The GX7 is currently the pick of the rangefinder-style brigade, and the E-M10 or used E-M5 are best overall value, edging the G6 out only because it is a notch behind (one generation) in several areas, but still a very fine camera. It just seems to offer little or no advance from your excellent GH2.

Can't disagree with these comments. The truth is we are presented with many good choices. I just hope Olympus and Panasonic prospers and continue to innovate.

I don't think it's surprising that two Magnum photographers have embraced the GX7 for their use, Ian Berry and Thomas Dworzak.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tY_LtdDw5Tk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9cPJyW_9MY - Both posted almost 1 year ago.




Logged

bcooter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1520
Re: Best M4/3 predominantly for stills
« Reply #39 on: September 09, 2014, 09:53:03 pm »

Don't have a gh4, but two gh3's, oly em1 and em5.

Gh3 is a great camera, not the very best still file in low light but good, kind of a warm cast out of the can even in raw as yellow/warm seems to be somewhat global.

The em1 is a GREAT camera, not so great menu (though you only have to learn and set it once) built like a rolex, actually build as well as a leica . . . but the em-1 like the gh4 uses a panasonic sensor.  Nice sensor but not deep, not incredibly color receptive.

The em-5 is not as good a camera, but has a sony sensor, very, very sharp, picks up color very well, allows for very nice post work.  The downside of the em-1, it's a little too small, some of the buttons and knobs are hard to work, even with small hands, but that file is something.

For stills, I'd buy the em-5 in a heartbeat compared to all the rest.

For video the gh3, for build quality the em-1.

BTW:  The olympus do not track focus well.  Extremely fast focus, great evf but they don't track.  The Gh3 and especially the gh4 will track focus almost as well as the best dslr.

IMO

BC
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Up